Matthew J. Selleck

Peritoneal carcinomatosis: limits of diagnosis and the case for liquid biopsy

Peritoneal Carcinomatosis (PC) is a late stage manifestation of several gastrointestinal malignancies including appendiceal, colorectal, and gastric cancer. In PC, tumors metastasize to and deposit on the peritoneal surface and often leave patients with only palliative treatment options. For colorectal PC, median survival is approximately five months, and palliative systemic therapy is able to extend this to approximately 12 months. However, cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) with a curative intent is possible in some patients with limited tumor burden. In well-selected patients undergoing complete cytoreduction, median survival has been reported as high as 63 month. Identifying patients earlier who are either at risk for, or who have recently developed PC may provide them with additional treatment options such as CRS/HIPEC. PC is diagnosed late by imaging findings or often times during an invasive procedures such as laparoscopy or laparotomy. In order to improve the outcomes of PC patients, a minimally invasive, accurate, and specific PC screening method needs to be developed. By utilizing circulating PC biomarkers in the serum of patients, a “liquid biopsy,” may be able to be generated to allow a tailored treatment plan and early intervention. Exosomes, stable patient-derived nanovesicles present in blood, urine, and many other bodily fluids, show promise as a tool for the evaluation of labile biomarkers. If liquid biopsies can be perfected in PC, manifestations of this cancer may be more effectively treated, thus offering improved survival.

Differential protein expression in exosomal samples taken from trauma patients

Traumatic brain injuries (TBI) are among the most misdiagnosed and underreported types of head trauma. The potential long‐term impact of undiagnosed or incorrectly identified concussions and other head injuries are potentially devastating, as evidenced by the increasing societal burden exhibited by soldiers returning from combat and athletes in contact sports. Concussions and TBI are notoriously difficult to correctly diagnose and prognosis for these injuries is poorly understood. In order to increase the likelihood of successful diagnosis, treatment, and prediction of outcomes, a definitive differential diagnosis will need to be established. The establishment of a “trauma–specific profile” or a panel of known trauma markers will significantly aid in this goal. Small membrane vesicles called exosomes have been shown to contain proteins and injury‐specific biomarkers. In the future it is possible that they could become an important tool, utilized for their diagnostic and therapeutic potential.

Association of Primary Tumor Site With Mortality in Patients Receiving Bevacizumab and Cetuximab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Importance Biologic therapy (BT) (eg, bevacizumab or cetuximab) is increasingly used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Recent investigations have suggested that right- or left-sided primary tumor origin affects survival and response to BT. Objective To evaluate the association of tumor origin with mortality in a diverse population-based data set of patients receiving systemic chemotherapy (SC) and bevacizumab or cetuximab for mCRC. Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based nonconcurrent cohort study of statewide California Cancer Registry data included all patients aged 40 to 85 years diagnosed with mCRC and treated with SC only or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Patients were stratified by tumor origin in the left vs right sides. Interventions Treatment with SC or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Main Outcomes and Measures Mortality hazards by tumor origin (right vs left sides) were assessed for patients receiving SC alone or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Subgroup analysis for patients with wild-type KRAS tumors was also performed. Results A total of 11 905 patients with mCRC (6713 men [56.4%] and 5192 women [43.6%]; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years) were eligible for the study. Among these, 4632 patients received SC and BT. Compared with SC alone, SC plus bevacizumab reduced mortality among patients with right- and left-sided mCRC, whereas SC plus cetuximab reduced mortality only among patients with left-sided tumors and was associated with significantly higher mortality for right-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.14-1.51; P < .001). Among patients treated with SC plus BT, right-sided tumor origin was associated with higher mortality among patients receiving bevacizumab (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36; P < .001) and cetuximab (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.68-2.12; P < .001) BT, compared with left-sided tumor origin. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors (n = 668), cetuximab was associated with reduced mortality among only patients with left-sided mCRC compared with bevacizumab (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P = .002), whereas patients with right-sided mCRC had more than double the mortality compared with those with left-sided mCRC (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.83-3.25, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Primary tumor site is associated with response to BT in mCRC. Right-sided primary tumor location is associated with higher mortality regardless of BT type. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors, treatment with cetuximab benefited only those with left-sided mCRC and was associated with significantly poorer survival among those with right-sided mCRC. Our results underscore the importance of stratification by tumor site for current treatment guidelines and future clinical trials.

Role of lymph node ratio in selection of adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy vs . chemoradiation) in patients with resected gastric cancer

Background Recent randomized controlled trials have failed to show a survival difference between adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with resected gastric cancer (GC). However, a subset of patients with lymph node (LN) positive disease may still benefit from CRT. Additional evidence is needed to help guide physicians in identifying patients in whom CRT should be considered. Our objective was then to compare survival outcomes based on lymph node ratio (LNR) (ratio of metastatic to harvested LNs) for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma treated with surgery and either CT or CRT. Methods This retrospective population-based study used California Cancer Registry (CCR) data from 2004 to 2013. It included 1,493 patients diagnosed with stage IB-III gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma and treated with CT or CRT following total or partial gastrectomy. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome and GC-specific survival was secondary. Mortality hazards ratios (HR) for these outcomes were computed using propensity score weighted Cox regression models, stratified by LNR strata categories as 0%, 1-9%, 10-25% and >25%. Results Out of 1,493 patients that met inclusion criteria, 462 were treated with CT while 1,031 received CRT. Median follow-up for all subjects was 76 months and median survival was 54 months for CRT and 35 for the CT cohort, P<0.001. Compared to CT, CRT was associated with improved survival among patients with LNR of 10-25% [HR =0.62 (95% CI, 0.46-0.83)] and >25% [HR =0.67 (95% CI, 0.56-0.80)]. Similar findings were observed for GC-specific survival and for analyses limited to patients that had at least 15 LNs evaluated. Conclusions LNR appears to be a simple and readily available measure that could be used in treatment planning for resected GC. CRT offers significant survival advantage over CT among patients with high LN disease burden (LNR of ≥10%).

Comparison of perioperative chemotherapy with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable gastric cancer: findings from a population-based study

Background Both perioperative chemotherapy (PC) and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) improve survival in resectable gastric cancer; however, these treatments have never been formally compared. Our objective was to evaluate treatment trends and compare survival outcomes for gastric cancer patients treated with surgery and either PC or CRT. Methods We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study between 2007 through 2013 using California Cancer Registry data. Patients diagnosed with stage IB-III gastric adenocarcinoma and treated with total or partial gastrectomy were eligible for this study. Based on the type of treatment received, patients were grouped into surgery-only, PC, or CRT. Primary and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and gastric cancer-specific survival (GCCS) respectively. Mortality hazards ratios (HRs) for each of these outcomes were computed using propensity score weighted and covariate-adjusted Cox regression models, stratified by clinical node status. Results Of 2,146 patients who underwent surgical resection, 1,067 had surgery-only, while 771 and 308 received PC or CRT, respectively. Median OS was 25, 33, and 52 months for surgery-only, PC, and CRT, respectively; P<0.001. Overall, patients treated with PC had significantly poorer survival compared to CRT (HR =1.45; 95% CI: 1.22-1.73). PC was also associated with higher mortality in patients with signet ring histology (HR =1.66; 95% CI: 1.21-2.28) and clinical node negative cancer (HR =1.85; 95% CI: 1.32-2.60). Survival was not different between PC vs. CRT in clinical node positive patients (HR =1.29; 95% CI: 0.84-2.08). Of note, the percentage of patients receiving PC increased from 17.5% in 2007-2008, to 41.5% in 2013-2014; P<0.001. Conclusions Despite the rapid adoption of PC, overall, CRT is associated with better survival than PC. Specifically, clinical node negative and signet ring histology patients had better survival when treated with CRT compared to PC. Based on these findings, we recommend against indiscriminate adoption of PC and consideration for CRT over PC in clinical node negative patients.

High-Risk Stage II Colon Cancer: Not All Risks Are Created Equal

IntroductionAdjuvant chemotherapy is recommended in patients with stage II colon cancer with high-risk features (HRF). However, there is no quantification of the amount of risk conferred by each HRF or the overall survival (OS) benefit gained by chemotherapy based on the risk factor.ObjectiveTo assess survival benefits associated with adjuvant chemotherapy among stage II colon cancer patients having one or more HRF [T4 tumors, less than 12 lymph nodes examined (< 12LN), positive margins, high-grade tumor, perineural invasion (PNI), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI)].MethodsPatients diagnosed with stage II colon cancer between 2010 and 2013 were identified from California Cancer Registry. Propensity score weighted all-cause mortality hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for combinations of HRF.ResultsA total of 5160 stage II colon cancer patients were identified, of which 2398 had at least one HRF and 510 of 2398 (21%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Compared with patients with a single HRF, presence of any 2 or ≥ 3 HRF showed increasingly poorer survival [HR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16–1.73 and HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.96–3.20, respectively]. Chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival only among patients with T4 as the single HRF (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34–0.78) or combinations involving T4 as T4/< 12 LN (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11–0.90), T4/high grade (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11–0.61), and T4/LVI (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04–0.61).ConclusionsNot all high-risk features have similar adverse effects on OS. T4 tumors and their combination with other HRF achieve the most survival benefit with adjuvant therapy. Type and number of high-risk features should be taken into consideration when recommending adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer.

Erratum to: Is Fecal Diversion Needed in Pelvic Anastomoses During Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC)?

Background The role of fecal diversion with pelvic anastomosis during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is not well defined.

Implications of abnormal preoperative axillary imaging in the post Z011 era

We read the recent paper evaluating the benefit of preoperative axillary imaging in clinically node negative patients by Pilewskie et al. in the February 2016 issue of the Journal of the American College of Surgeons with great interest (1). The authors took an interesting approach to evaluate the role of axillary imaging, more specifically the role of abnormal axillary imaging in predicting the need for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in T1–T2 breast cancer patients who were deemed node negative by physical exam and managed according to ACOSOG Z011 criteria.