Treatment strategies and overall survival for incurable metastatic colorectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison including 21,196 patients from the Netherlands and Norway.

BACKGROUND: The potential benefit of surgery of the primary tumour in patients with asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer is debated. This EURECCA international comparison analyses treatment strategies and overall survival in the Netherlands and Norway in patients with incurable metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: National cohorts (2007-2013) from the Netherlands and Norway including all patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer were compared on treatment strategy and overall survival. Using country as an instrumental variable, we assessed the effect of different treatment strategies on mortality in the first year. RESULTS: Of 21,196 patients (16,144 Dutch and 5052 Norwegian), 38.6% Dutch and 51.5% (p < 0.001) Norwegian patients underwent resection of the primary tumour. In the Netherlands, 58.2% received chemotherapy compared with 21.4% in Norway. Radiotherapy was given in 9.5% of Dutch patients and 7.2% of Norwegian patients. Using the Netherlands as reference, the adjusted HR for overall survival was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.99; p = 0.024). Instrumental variable analysis showed an adjusted OR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.02; p = 0.741). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment strategies varied significantly between the Netherlands and Norway, with more surgery and less radiotherapy in Norway. Adjusted overall survival was better in Norway for all patients and patients <75 years, but not for patients ≥75 years. Instrumental variable analysis showed no benefit in one-year mortality for a treatment strategy with a higher proportion of surgery and a lower proportion of radiotherapy. Our findings emphasise the need for further research to select patients with incurable metastatic colorectal cancer for different treatment options.

Decrease in 30-day and one-year mortality over time in patients aged ≥75 years with stage I-III colon cancer: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring time trends of cancer mortality is essential. Thirty-day mortality is an important surgical outcome measure, though postoperative mortality exceeds to one year after surgery in patients with colorectal cancer. The aim of this nationwide observational study was to assess changes over time in 30-day and one-year mortality in patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer. METHODS: All surgically treated patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer, diagnosed between 2009 and 2013 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes in 30-day and one-year mortality were assessed using logistic regression by tumour localisation (colon, rectum) and age group (<75 years, ≥75 years). RESULTS: Overall, 41,186 patients were included. Among patients with colon cancer ≥75 years, 30-day mortality decreased from 8.3% in 2009 to 6.2% in 2013 (p-value for trend = 0.011), and one-year mortality from 18.5% in 2009 to 15.0% in 2013 (p-value for trend = 0.007). No significant differences in mortality over time were observed for patients <75 years with colon cancer and for patients with rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: Thirty-day and one-year mortality decreased over time in patients ≥75 years with stage I-III colon cancer, though the absolute decrease is small. However, 30-day mortality and in particular the one-year mortality are both still high in older patients with colorectal cancer and will need to be focused on to further improve outcomes for these patient subgroups.

Comprehensive multidisciplinary care program for elderly colorectal cancer patients: "From prehabilitation to independence".

BACKGROUND: We implemented a multidisciplinary pre- and rehabilitation program for elderly patients (≥75 years of age) in a single center consisting of prehabilitation, laparoscopic surgery and early rehabilitation with the intention to lower 1-year overall mortality. METHODS: In this study we compared all patients that underwent elective surgery for stage I-III colorectal cancer before and during development and after implementation of the program (2010-2011, 2012-2013 and 2014-2015). Primary endpoint was 1-year overall mortality, the secondary endpoint was 30-day postoperative outcome. RESULTS: Eighty-six consecutive patients were included in the study cohort and compared to 63 patients from 2010 to 2011 and 75 patients from 2012 to 2013. Patient characteristics were comparable; median age in the study cohort was 80.6. Seventy-three patients (85%) participated in the program, 54 (63%) of whom followed a prehabilitation program, 46 (53%) of whom were discharged to a rehabilitation center. Laparoscopic surgery increased over the years from 70% to 83% in the study cohort. There was a trend in lower 1-year overall mortality: 11% versus 3% (p=0.08). There was a significant reduction in cardiac complications and the number of patients with a prolonged length of stay (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary care for elderly colorectal cancer patients that includes prehabilitation and rehabilitation is feasible and may contribute to lower complications and reduced length of stay. This study did not show a clear benefit of implementing a comprehensive care program including both prehabilitation and rehabilitation. Dedicated multidisciplinary care seems the key attributer to favorable outcomes of CRC surgery in elderly patients.

Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Spain, and Lithuania.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this EURECCA international comparison is to compare oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival of patients with stage I-III rectal cancer between European countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Population-based national cohort data from the Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), Spain (ES), and single-centre data from Lithuania (LT) were obtained. All operated patients with (y)pTNM stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 were included. Oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival were calculated and compared between neighbouring countries. RESULTS: We included 57,120 patients. Treatment strategies differed between NL and BE (p < 0.001), DK and SE (p < 0.001), and ENG and IE (p < 0.001). More preoperative radiotherapy as single treatment before surgery was administered in NL compared with BE (59.7% vs. 13.1%), in SE compared with DK (55.1% vs. 10.4%), and in ENG compared with IE (15.2% vs. 9.6%). Less postoperative chemotherapy was given in NL (9.6% vs. 39.1%), in SE (7.9% vs. 14.1%), and in IE (12.6% vs. 18.5%) compared with their neighbouring country. In ES, 55.1% of patients received preoperative chemoradiation and 62.3% postoperative chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in relative survival between neighbouring countries. CONCLUSION: Large differences in oncologic treatment strategies for patients with (y)pTNM I-III rectal cancer were observed across European countries. No clear relation between oncologic treatment strategies and relative survival was observed. Further research into selection criteria for specific treatments could eventually lead to individualised and optimal treatment for patients with non-metastasised rectal cancer.

Administration of adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with Stage III colon cancer: an observational study.

AIM: According to established guidelines, patients with Stage III colon cancer should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. However, a significant proportion do not. This study assessed factors associated with the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy and causes of death. METHODS: Patients with Stage III colon cancer who underwent surgery between 2000 and 2009 were selected from two hospitals in the Netherlands. Patient characteristics including comorbidities and treatment preferences, tumour characteristics and follow-up were extracted from the medical records. The patient and tumour characteristics of patients who did receive chemotherapy were compared with those who did not using chi-squared analysis. Differences between the groups in causes of death were recorded together with the duration of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 348 patients were included. The median age was 73 years (range 33-93). Over half of the patients received adjuvant chemotherapy (50.6%). Patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly older (P < 0.001), had more comorbidities (P < 0.001) and were more often living alone (P < 0.001). Patients who received no adjuvant chemotherapy had a reduced overall survival, and the cause of death was more often attributed to other causes (60%) than colon cancer (40%). For patients who received chemotherapy, the cause of death was usually attributed to colon cancer (71%). CONCLUSION: Patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy had a worse overall survival and the majority died due to other causes than colon cancer. In our aging society it will become even more important to develop tools to estimate remaining life expectancy in order to improve the selection of older patients for adjuvant treatments.

Adjuvant chemotherapy and relative survival of patients with stage II colon cancer - A EURECCA international comparison between the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, England, Ireland, Belgium, and Lithuania.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present EURECCA international comparison is to compare adjuvant chemotherapy and relative survival of patients with stage II colon cancer between European countries. METHODS: Population-based national cohort data (2004-2009) from the Netherlands (NL), Denmark (DK), Sweden (SE), England (ENG), Ireland (IE), and Belgium (BE) were obtained, as well as single-centre data from Lithuania. All surgically treated patients with stage II colon cancer were included. The proportion of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was calculated and compared between countries. Besides, relative survival was calculated and compared between countries. RESULTS: Overall, 59,154 patients were included. The proportion of patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy ranged from 7.1% to 29.0% (p < 0.001). Compared with NL, a better adjusted relative survival was observed in SE (stage II: relative excess risks (RER) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.64; p < 0.001), and BE (stage II: RER 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.92; p < 0.001), and in IE for patients with stage IIA disease (RER 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients with stage II colon cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy varied largely between seven European countries. No clear linear pattern between adjuvant chemotherapy and adjusted relative survival was observed. Compared with NL, SE and BE showed an improved adjusted relative survival for stage II disease, and IE for patients with stage IIA disease only. Further research into selection criteria for adjuvant chemotherapy could eventually lead to individually tailored, optimal treatment of patients with stage II colon cancer.

Association Between the Most Frequent Complications After Surgery for Stage I-III Colon Cancer and Short-Term Survival, Long-Term Survival, and Recurrences.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to identify the ten most frequent complications after surgery for stage I-III colon cancer and to assess the association between these complications and overall survival, conditional overall survival, and recurrences. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery for stage I-III colon cancer in five hospitals in the Western region of the Netherlands were identified. Crude and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to study the association between complications and 1-year overall survival, 5-year overall survival, 5-year conditional overall survival, and 5-year disease-free period. RESULTS: Data from 761 patients were used for the analyses. Complications were associated with decreased 1-year overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 2.87, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.82-4.51; p < 0.001), 5-year overall survival (HR 1.59, 95 % CI 1.25-2.04; p < 0.001), and 5-year conditional overall survival (HR 1.34, 95 % CI 1.06-1.69; p = 0.016), whereas an increasing number of complications had no additional impact. Anastomotic leakage, excessive blood loss, and (abdominal) sepsis were associated with reduced 1-year overall survival, anastomotic leakage, delirium, abscess, and (abdominal) sepsis with reduced 5-year overall survival, and anastomotic leakage, delirium, and abscess with reduced 5-year conditional overall survival. Anastomotic leakage, electrolyte disorders, and abscess were risk factors for recurrence within five years. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the serious impact of the most frequent complications after surgery for colon cancer on short-term and long-term outcomes. This study confirms the prolonged impact of surgery and demonstrates that complications result not only in reduced 1-year survival, but also in reduced long-term outcomes.

Effect of preoperative treatment strategies on the outcome of patients with clinical T3, non-metastasized rectal cancer: A comparison between Dutch and Canadian expert centers.

AIM: High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) appears to be associated with less treatment-related toxicity compared with external beam radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. The present study compared the effect of preoperative treatment strategies on overall survival, cancer-specific deaths, and local recurrences between a Dutch and Canadian expert center with different preoperative treatment strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 145 Dutch and 141 Canadian patients with cT3, non-metastasized rectal cancer. All patients from Canada were preoperatively treated with HDRBT. The preoperative treatment strategy for Dutch patients consisted of either no preoperative treatment, short-course radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing overall survival. We adjusted for age, cN stage, (y)pT stage, comorbidity, and type of surgery. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were cancer-specific deaths and local recurrences. RESULTS: Five-year overall survival was 70.9% (95% CI 62.6%-77.7%) in Dutch patients compared with 86.9% (80.1%-91.6%) in Canadian patients, resulting in an adjusted HR of 0.70 (95% CI 0.39-1.26; p = 0.233). Of 145 Dutch patients, 6.9% (95% CI 2.8%-11.0%) had a local recurrence and 17.9% (95% CI 11.7%-24.2%) patients died of rectal cancer, compared with 4.3% (95% CI 0.9%-7.5%) local recurrences and 10.6% (95% CI 5.5%-15.7%) rectal cancer deaths out of 141 Canadian patients. CONCLUSION: We did not detect statistically significant differences in overall survival between a Dutch and Canadian expert center with different treatment strategies. This finding needs to be further investigated in a randomized controlled trial.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision: a Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 × 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 × 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39). CONCLUSION: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence rate. However, this trial did not complete planned accrual. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Colorectal Cancer group, CKTO 2003-16, ISRCTN36266738.

Quality assurance in the treatment of colorectal cancer: the EURECCA initiative.

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers in Europe. Over the past few decades, important advances have been made in screening, staging and treatment of colorectal cancer. However, considerable variation between and within European countries remains, which implies that further improvements are possible. The most important remaining question now is: when are we, health care professionals, delivering the best available care to patients with colon or rectal cancer? Currently, quality assurance is a major issue in colorectal cancer care and quality assurance awareness is developing in almost all disciplines involved in the treatment of colorectal cancer patients. Quality assurance has shown to be effective in clinical trials. For example, standardisation and quality control were introduced in the Dutch TME trial and led to marked improvements of local control and survival in rectal cancer patients. Besides, audit structures can also be very effective in monitoring cancer management and national audits showed to further improve outcome in colorectal cancer patients. To reduce the differences between European countries, an international, multidisciplinary, outcome-based quality improvement programme, European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA), has been initiated. In the near future, the EURECCA dataset will perform research on subgroups as elderly patients or patients with comorbidities, which are often excluded from trials. For optimal colorectal cancer care, quality assurance in guideline formation and in multidisciplinary team management is also of great importance. The aim of this review was to create greater awareness and to give an overview of quality assurance in the management of colorectal cancer.

Experts reviews of the multidisciplinary consensus conference colon and rectal cancer 2012: science, opinions and experiences from the experts of surgery.

The first multidisciplinary consensus conference on colon and rectal cancer was held in December 2012, achieving a majority of consensus for diagnostic and treatment decisions using the Delphi Method. This article will give a critical appraisal of the topics discussed during the meeting and in the consensus document by well-known leaders in surgery that were involved in this multidisciplinary consensus process. Scientific evidence, experience and opinions are collected to support multidisciplinary teams (MDT) with arguments for medical decision-making in diagnosis, staging and treatment strategies for patients with colon or rectal cancer. Surgery is the cornerstone of curative treatment for colon and rectal cancer. Standardizing treatment is an effective instrument to improve outcome of multidisciplinary cancer care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. In this article, a review of the following focuses; Perioperative care, age and colorectal surgery, obstructive colorectal cancer, stenting, surgical anatomical considerations, total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery and training, surgical considerations for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and local recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), surgery in stage IV colorectal cancer, definitions of quality of surgery, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery, preoperative radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, and how about functional outcome after surgery?