Steven Nurkin

Colon cancer, version 1.2017: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Bladder Cancer focuses on systemic therapy for muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer, as substantial revisions were made in the 2017 updates, such as new recommendations for nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer addresses additional aspects of the management of bladder cancer, including non-muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer and nonurothelial histologies, as well as staging, evaluation, and follow-up.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Noncolorectal Surgery?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Major Abdominal Surgery.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols across noncolorectal abdominal surgical procedures. Background: ERAS programs have been studied extensively in colorectal surgery and adopted at many centers. Several studies testing such protocols have shown promising results in improving postoperative outcomes across various surgical procedures. However, surgeons performing major abdominal procedures have been slower to adopt these ERAS protocols. Methods: A systematic review was performed using “enhanced recovery after surgery” or “fast track” as search terms and excluded studies of colorectal procedures. Primary endpoints for the meta-analysis include length of stay (LOS) and complication rate. Secondary endpoints were time to first flatus, readmission rate, and costs. Results: A total of 39 studies (6511 patients) met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among them 14 studies were randomized trials, and the remaining 25 studies were cohort studies. Meta-analysis showed a decrease in LOS of 2.5 days (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.8–3.2, P < 0.001) and a complication rate of 0.70 (95% CI: 0.56–0.86, P = 0.001) for patient treated in ERAS programs. There was also a significant reduction in time to first flatus of 0.8 days (95% CI: 0.4–1.1, P < 0.001) and cost reduction of

Quality of life after an esophagectomy.

5109.10 (95% CI:

Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A 2005–2011 NSQIP comparison of modern multicenter results

4365.80–

Association Between Clinically Staged Node-Negative Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Overall Survival Benefit From Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

5852.40, P < 0.001). There was no significant increase in readmission rate (OR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.84–1.26, P = 0.80) in our analysis. Conclusions: ERAS protocols decreased length of stay and cost by not increasing complications or readmission rates. This study adds to the evidence that ERAS protocols are safe to implement and are beneficial to surgical patients and the healthcare system across multiple abdominal procedures.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights Colon Cancer, Version 2.2018 Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

Specialized centers have reduced the adverse outcomes associated with esophagectomy in the last 2 decades and now report operative mortalities of less than 5%. With the expanding use of screening endoscopy, early invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma is diagnosed more commonly. As a result, more patients enjoy long-term survival after curative resection. Simultaneously, emerging evidence supports the equivalence of competing endoscopic therapies for treatment of very early cancers and benign diseases. Accordingly, surgical resection requires re-evaluation using enhanced parameters to enable more meaningful comparative outcome analyses. This article summarizes the current evidence and examines future directions regarding esophagectomy quality of life.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal/gastroesophageal carcinoma.

The surgical approach to esophageal cancer continues to be controversial. A transthoracic approach is often advocated for better oncologic staging and improved survival. A transhiatal approach is often preferred due to a perceived decreased operative morbidity and mortality.

Ablative Therapy for Esophageal Dysplasia and Early Malignancy: Focus on RFA

IMPORTANCE While neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer improves oncologic outcomes for a broad group of patients with locally advanced and/or node-positive tumors, it is less clear which specific subset of patients derives most benefit in terms of overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVE To determine whether neoadjuvant chemoradiation based on esophageal adenocarcinoma histology has similar oncologic outcomes for patients treated with surgery alone when stratified by clinical nodal status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective analysis using the American College of Surgeons National Cancer Database from 1998 to 2006. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma histology and clinical stage T1bN1-N3 or T2-T4aN-/+M0 were divided into 2 treatment groups: (1) neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery and (2) surgery alone. Subset analysis within each treatment group was performed for clinically node-negative patients (cN-) vs node-positive patients (cN+) in conjunction with pathological nodal status. A propensity score-adjusted analysis, which included patient demographics, comorbidity status, and clinical T stage, was also performed. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES The primary outcome was 3-year OS. Secondary outcomes included margin status, postoperative length of stay, unplanned readmission rate, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS A total of 1309 patients were identified, of whom 539 received neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery and 770 received surgery alone. Of the 1309 patients, 41.2% (n = 539) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and 47.2% (n = 618) were cN+. Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 73.3 months (interquartile range, 64.1-93.5 months). The 3-year OS was better for neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery compared with surgery alone (49% vs 38%, respectively; P < .001). Stratifying based on clinical nodal status, the propensity score-adjusted OS was significantly better for cN+ patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.66; P < .001). In contrast, there was no difference in OS for cN- patients based on treatment (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65-1.10; P = .22). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with cN+ esophageal adenocarcinoma benefit significantly from neoadjuvant chemoradiation. However, patients with cN- tumors treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus surgery do not derive a significant OS benefit compared with surgery alone. This finding may have significant implications on the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with cN- disease.

Margin Status, Local Recurrence, and Survival: Correlation or Causation?

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.

Lymphovascular and perineural invasion are associated with poor prognostic features and outcomes in colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND Esophageal/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is increasingly treated with trimodality therapy. We present our experience using carboplatin/paclitaxel and radiotherapy followed by surgery. METHODS Consecutive patients with distal esophageal/GEJ adenocarcinoma (≥T2 or N+) treated from July 2010 to October 2011 were identified. Treatment included neoadjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (CRT) to 50.4 Gy using an IMRT technique and then Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy (ILE). PET/CT was performed prior to and after CRT. Patient/treatment characteristics and tumor response were analyzed. RESULTS Over this timeframe, 16 patients completed trimodality therapy. All were male, median age of 60 years (45-72 years). All tumors were grade 2-3 with mean tumor length of 4.4 cm (1-9 cm). A median of 6 cycles (5-9 cycles) neoadjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel were administered. Average time from diagnosis to CRT completion was 76 days (44-141 days) and 60 days (35-92 days) from CRT end to surgery. Neoadjuvant CRT was well tolerated with mean weight loss of 3.9 kg. All pts had R0 resections. No anastomotic leaks or perioperative mortality occurred. Mean hospital stay was 13 days (8-28 days). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was seen in 38% of patients, microscopic residual disease (isolated tumor cells or <2 mm) in 31%, and macroscopic residual disease remained in 31%. Mean SUV reduction was 41% (0-100%). Of 11 patients with ≥35% SUV decrease, 45% had pCR and 27% had microscopic residual disease. Three patients had signet ring features. Of these, 2 had no SUV reduction and all had gross residual disease, including the only patient with positive nodal disease. CONCLUSIONS Trimodality therapy utilizing concurrent carboplatin/paclitaxel and radiotherapy to 50.4 Gy followed by surgery was well tolerated and resulted in significant pathologic complete response or minimal residual disease. Further investigation of predictive factors for response is needed to best tailor therapy in the management of esophageal/GEJ adenocarcinoma.