Survival nomograms for simultaneous resection of primary and hepatic lesions without neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis.

Background: No well-performing nomogram has been developed specifically to predict individual-patient cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) who undergo simultaneous resection of primary and hepatic lesions without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). We aim to investigate the prognosis of patients with resectable CRLM undergoing simultaneous resection of primary and hepatic lesions without NAC. Methods: Data of patients with CRLM in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (cohort, n = 225) were collected as the training set, and data of patients with CRLM treated at the National Cancer Center (cohort, n = 180) were collected as the validation set. The prognostic value of the clinicopathological parameters in the training cohort was assessed using Kaplan‒Meier curves and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, and OS and CSS nomograms integrated with the prognostic variables were constructed. Calibration analyses, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and decision curve analyses (DCAs) were then performed to evaluate the performance of the nomograms. Results: There was no collinearity among the collected variables. Three factors were associated with OS and CSS: the pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) concentration, pathologic N (pN) stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy (each p < 0.05). OS and CSS nomograms were constructed using these three parameters. The calibration plots revealed favorable agreement between the predicted and observed outcomes. The areas under the ROC curves were approximately 0.7. The DCA plots revealed that both nomograms had satisfactory clinical benefits. The ROC curves and DCAs also confirmed that the nomogram surpassed the tumor, node, and metastasis staging system. Conclusion: The herein-described nomograms containing the pretreatment CEA concentration, pN stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy may be effective models for predicting postoperative survival in patients with CRLM.

The safety and prognosis of radical surgery in colorectal cancer patients over 80 years old.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of radical surgery and to investigate prognostic factors influencing in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients over the age of 80. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2020, 372 elderly CRC patients who underwent curative resection at the National Cancer Center were enrolled in the study. Preoperative clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and postoperative pathological features were all collected. RESULTS: A total of 372 elderly patients with colorectal cancer were included in the study, including 226 (60.8%) men and 146 (39.2%) women. A total of 219 (58.9%) patients had a BMI < 24 kg/m2, and 153 (41.1%) patients had a BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2. The mean operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 152.3 ± 58.1 min and 67.6 ± 35.4 ml, respectively. The incidence of overall postoperative complications was 28.2% (105/372), and the incidence of grade 3-4 complications was 14.7% (55/372). In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2 (HR, 2.30, 95% CI, 1.27-4.17; P = 0.006) and N1-N2 stage (HR: 2.97; 95% CI, 1.48-5.97; P = 0.002) correlated with worse CSS. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study showed that radical resection for CRC is safe and feasible for patients over the age of 80. After radical resection, BMI and N stage were independent prognostic factors for elderly CRC patients.

Development of novel DNAJB6-KIAA1522-p-mTOR three-protein prognostic prediction models for CRC.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the prognostic value of DNAJB6, KIAA1522, and p-mTOR expression for colorectal cancer (CRC) and to develop effective prognostic models for CRC patients. METHODS: The expression of DNAJB6, KIAA1522, and p-mTOR (Ser2448) was detected using immunohistochemistry in 329 CRC specimens. The prognostic values of the three proteins in the training cohort were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Prediction nomogram models integrating the three proteins and TNM stage were constructed. Subsequently, calibration curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, the concordance index (C-index), and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the performance of the nomograms in the training and validation cohorts. RESULTS: The three proteins DNAJB6, KIAA1522, and p-mTOR were significantly overexpressed in CRC tissues (each P < 0.01), and their expression was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) (each P < 0.05). The area under the ROC curves (AUC) and C-index values were approximately 0.7. Additionally, the calibration curves showed that the predicted values and the actual values fit well. Furthermore, DCA curves indicated that the clinical value of the nomogram models was higher than that of TNM stage. Overall, the novel prediction models have good discriminability, sensitivity, specificity and clinical utility. CONCLUSION: The nomograms containing DNAJB6, KIAA1522, and p-mTOR may be promising models for predicting postoperative survival in CRC.

Oncological outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastasis: A result from a propensity score matching study.

Background: The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in treating resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remain controversial. Methods: Data from CRLM patients who underwent simultaneous liver resection between January 2015 and December 2019 were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (SEER cohort, n=305) and a single Chinese Cancer Center (NCC cohort, n=268). Using a 1:2 ratio of propensity score matching (PSM), the prognostic impact of NAC for patients who underwent NAC before surgical treatment and patients who underwent surgical treatment alone was evaluated. Results: After PSM, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between patients receiving NAC prior to CRLM resection and those undergoing surgery only, in both the NCC and SEER cohorts (each P > 0.05). Age was an independent predictor of OS only in the SEER cohort (P = 0.040), while the pN stage was an independent predictor for OS only in the NCC cohort (P = 0.002). Furthermore, Disease-free survival (DFS) was comparable between the two groups in the NCC cohort. In a subgroup analysis, the DFS and OS in the NAC- group were significantly worse than those in the NAC+ group for patients with more than two liver metastases in the NCC cohort (P < 0.05 for both). Conclusion: NAC did not have a significant prognostic impact in patients with resectable synchronous CRLM. However, patients with more than two liver metastases could be good candidates for receiving NAC.

Oncologic Benefit of Adjuvant Therapy in Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection.

Background: It remains controversial whether the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) to total mesorectal excision (TME) plus lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LLND) can provide a survival benefit after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in patients with clinically suspected lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis (LPNM). We aim to investigate the effectiveness of ACT after nCRT with TME plus LLND for patients with clinically suspected LPNM. Methods: From January 2015 to December 2021, 138 patients with clinically suspected LPNM who were treated with nCRT followed by TME plus LLND at three institutions were enrolled in this study. The patients were categorized into the ACT group (n = 95) and the non-ACT group (n = 43). Results: The mean follow-up period was 37 months. The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate for the entire cohort was 74.8%. Ninety-five patients (68.8%) received ACT, without any oncologic benefit (3-year DFS rates for the ACT and non-ACT groups were 67.0% and 80.5%, respectively, P = 0.130). Additionally, multivariate analysis showed that lymphatic invasion (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.26, P = 0.005) was an independent risk factor for DFS. Subgroup analyses revealed that for patients ≥ 64 years and those with ypStage 0, the distribution of 95% confidence interval (CI) values tended to focus on the non-ACT strategy. Conclusion: The efficacy of the addition of ACT to TME plus LLND after nCRT in LARC patients with clinically suspected LPNM was not confirmed in this study. Moreover, patients with age ≥ 64 years and those with ypStage 0 may not receive benefit from ACT after nCRT followed by TME plus LLND.