Rectal Cancer and Radiation in Colitis.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. When IBD patients develop a rectal cancer, this should be treated with the same oncological principles and guidelines as the general population. Rectal cancer treatment includes surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy (RT). Many IBD patients will require a total proctocolectomy with an ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and others, restoration of intestinal continuity may not be feasible or advisable. The literature is scarce regarding outcomes of IPAA after RT. In the present review, we will summarize the evidence regarding RT toxicity in IBD patients and review surgical strategies and outcomes of IPAA after RT.

Chemoradiation and Local Excision Versus Total Mesorectal Excision for T2N0 Rectal Cancer: Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes From 2 Prospective Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Compare oncological long-term and short-term outcomes between patients with distal cT2NO rectal cancer treated with chemoradio-therapy and local excision (CRT + LE) and patients treated with total mesorectal excision (TME). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies showed that CRT + LE is equivalent to TME in local tumor control and survival for T2N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma treated with CRT + LE in the ACOSOG Z6041 trial were compared to a cohort of 79 patients with pT2N0 tumors treated with upfront TME in the Dutch TME trial. Survival, short-term outcomes, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were compared between groups. RESULTS: Three patients (4%) in the CRT + LE group required abdominoperineal resection, compared with 31 (40%) in the TME group. Forty TME patients (51%) required a permanent stoma. CRT-related toxicity occurred in 43% of the CRT + LE patients; however, TME patients had a higher rate of complications requiring reoperation (1 vs 9%; P = 0 .03). Five-year disease-free survival {88.2% [confidence interval (CI), 77.7%-93.9%] vs 88.3% [CI, 78.7%-93.7%]; P = 0.88} and overall survival [90.3% (CI, 80.8%-95.3%) vs 88.4% (CI, 78.9%-93.8%); P = 0 .82] were similar in the 2 groups. Compared to baseline, overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in the TME group. In both groups, patients with sphincter preservation had worse HRQOL scores 1 year after surgery. Conclusions: In patients who underwent CRT + LE, oncological outcomes were similar to those of patients who underwent TME, with fewer complications requiring reoperation but significant CRT toxicity. Although overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in TME patients, when considering anorectal function, results were worse in both groups.

Operative, long-term and quality of life outcomes after salvage of failed re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis.

AIM: Approximately 20%-40% of the patients with re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) experience pouch failure. Salvage surgery can be attempted in this patient group with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy. The literature regarding secondary IPAA revision after re-do IPAA failure is scarce. METHODS: All patients who underwent a secondary IPAA revision after re-do IPAA failure between September 2016 and July 2021 in a single centre were included. Short- and long-term outcomes and quality of life in this patient group are reported. RESULTS: Ten patients who had secondary IPAA revision for re-do IPAA failure were included. All patients had ulcerative colitis. Nine of these patients had pelvic sepsis and one patient had a mechanical issue. Mucosectomy and handsewn anastomosis was performed in nine patients. The existing pouch was salvaged in six patients and four patients had pouch excision and re-creation. Two patients had postoperative pelvic sepsis. Pouch retention rate was 78% in a median of 28 months. None of the patients had short-gut syndrome. The procedure was associated with good quality of life (median Cleveland Global Quality of Life Index 0.8). All patients would undergo the same surgery if needed. CONCLUSION: Secondary IPAA revision after a failed re-do IPAA can be an option in patients with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy if re-do IPAA fails and it is associated with good outcomes. This patient group should be carefully evaluated and referred to specialized centres if required.

Management, Functional Outcomes, and Quality of Life After Development of Pelvic Sepsis in Patients Undergoing Re-Do Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: The data on management and outcomes of pelvic sepsis after re-do IPAA are scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report our management algorithm of pelvic sepsis in the setting of re-do IPAA and compare functional outcomes and quality of life after successful management of pelvic sepsis with a no sepsis control group. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This investigation is based on a single academic practice group experience on re-do IPAA. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent re-do IPAA for ileal pouch failure between September 2016 and September 2020 were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Management of pelvic sepsis was reported. Functional outcomes, restrictions, and quality-of-life scores were compared between the sepsis and no sepsis groups. RESULTS: One-hundred ten patients were included in our study, of whom 25 (22.7%) developed pelvic sepsis. Twenty-three patients presented with pelvic sepsis before ileostomy closure, and 2 patients presented with pelvic sepsis after ileostomy closure. There were 6 pouch failures in the study period due to pelvic sepsis. Our management was successful in 79% of the patients with median follow-up of 26 months. Treatments included interventional radiology abscess drainage (n = 7), IV antibiotics alone (n = 5), interventional radiology drainage and mushroom catheter placement (n = 1), mushroom catheter placement (n = 1), and endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (n = 1). Average number of bowel movements, urgency, incontinence, pad use, and seepage were comparable between the pelvic sepsis and no pelvic sepsis groups ( p > 0.05). Lifestyle alterations, Cleveland Global Quality of Life scores, and happiness with the results of the surgery were similar ( p > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its low study power and limited follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic sepsis is common after re-do IPAA, and management varies according to the location and size of the abscess/sinus. If detected early, our management strategy was associated with high pouch salvage rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B823 . MANEJO, RESULTADOS FUNCIONALES Y CALIDAD DE VIDA DESPUS DEL DESARROLLO DE SEPSIS PLVICA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDAS A RECONFECCIN DE ANASTOMOSIS ANAL CON BOLSA ILEAL: ANTECEDENTES:Los datos sobre el tratamiento y los resultados de la sepsis pélvica después de reconfección de anastomosis anal, de la bolsa ileal son escasos.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio es informar nuestro algoritmo de manejo de la sepsis pélvica en el contexto de reconfección de anastomosis anal de la bolsa ileal y comparar los resultados funcionales y la calidad de vida después del manejo exitoso de la sepsis pélvica con un grupo de control sin sepsis.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Esta investigación se basa en una experiencia de un solo grupo de práctica académica sobre reconfección de IPAA.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en el estudio pacientes que se sometieron a una nueva anastomosis anal, del reservorio ileal por falla del reservorio ileal entre el 09/2016 y el 09/2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se informó el manejo de la sepsis pélvica. Los resultados funcionales, las restricciones y las puntuaciones de calidad de vida, se compararon entre los grupos con sepsis y sin sepsis.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 110 pacientes en nuestro estudio, de los cuales 25 (22,7) desarrollaron sepsis pélvica. Veintitrés pacientes presentaron sepsis pélvica antes del cierre de la ileostomía y 2 pacientes presentaron sepsis pélvica después del cierre de la ileostomía. Hubo 6 fallas de la bolsa en el período de estudio debido a sepsis pélvica. Nuestro manejo fue exitoso en el 79% de los pacientes con una mediana de seguimiento de 26 meses. Los tratamientos incluyeron drenaje de abscesos IR (n = 7), antibióticos intravenosos solos (n = 5), drenaje IR y colocación de catéter en forma de hongo (n = 1), colocación de catéter en forma de hongo (n = 1) y cierre endoluminal asistido por vacío (n = 1). El número promedio de evacuaciones intestinales, urgencia, incontinencia, uso de almohadillas y filtraciones fueron comparables entre los grupos con sepsis pélvica y sin sepsis pélvica ( p > 0,05). Las alteraciones del estilo de vida, las puntuaciones de la Calidad de vida global de Cleveland y la felicidad con los resultados de la cirugía fueron similares ( p > 0,05).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su bajo poder de estudio y su tiempo de seguimiento limitado.CONCLUSIONES:La sepsis pélvica es común después de la reconfección de anastomosis anal de la bolsa ileal y el manejo varía según la ubicación y el tamaño del absceso / seno. Si se detecta temprano, nuestra estrategia de manejo se asoció con altas tasas de recuperación de la bolsa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B823 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Pelvic Pouch Failure: Treatment Options.

Up to 30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will require surgical management of their disease during their lifetime. An ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the gold standard of care, giving patients the ability to be free from UC's bowel disease and avoid a permanent ostomy. Despite surgical advancements, a minority of patients will still experience pouch failure which can be debilitating and often require further surgical interventions. Signs and symptoms of pouch failure should be addressed with the appropriate workup and treatment plans formulated according with the patient's wishes. This article will discuss the identification, workup, and treatment options for pouch failure after IPAA.

Re-do Laparoscopic Gastrojejunostomy for Gastrojejunal Anastomosis Stricture After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

Stricture of the gastrojejunostomy is a possible complication after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. We present the case of a patient with stricture refractory to endoscopic dilation. The patient underwent laparoscopic revision of the gastrojejunostomy with a hand-sewn anastomosis.

Comparing outcomes of robotic versus open mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of robot-assisted mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, compared with open resection, have not been fully characterized. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of pathologic, short-term, and long-term outcomes in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent total or tumour-specific mesorectal excision at a high-volume cancer centre between 2008 and 2017 was conducted. Outcomes after robotic and open surgery were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Out of 1048 resections performed, 1018 patients were reviewed, with 638 who underwent robotic surgery and 380 open surgery. Robotic surgery was converted to the open approach in 17 (2.7 per cent) patients. Patients who underwent robotic surgery were younger (median 54 (range 22-91) years versus median 58 (range 18-97) years; P < 0.001), had higher tumours (median 80 (range 0-150) mm from the anal verge versus median 70 (0-150) mm; P = 0.001), and were less likely to have received neoadjuvant therapy (64 per cent versus 73 per cent; P = 0.003). For patients who underwent a robotic total mesorectal excision, the operating time was longer (median 283.5 (range 117-712) min versus median 249 (range 70-661) min; P < 0.001). However, the rate of complications was lower (29 per cent versus 45 per cent; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay was shorter (median 5 (range 1-32) days versus median 7 (range 0-137) days; P < 0.001). Median follow-up of survivors was 2.9 years. The proportion of patients with a positive circumferential resection margin did not differ between the groups, nor did the rate of local recurrence (robotic versus open: 3.7 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 1.9 to 5.6 versus 2.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 1.0 to 4.6; P = 0.400), systemic recurrence (robotic versus open: 11.7 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 8.5 to 14.8 versus 13.0 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 9.2 to 16.5; P = 0.300), or overall survival (robotic versus open: 97.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 96.3 to 99.3 versus 93.5 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 90.8 to 96.2; P = 0.050). The same results were documented in a subanalysis of 370 matched patients, including 185 who underwent robotic surgery and 185 open surgery, for the overall incidence of any postoperative complications, overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and systemic recurrence. CONCLUSION: In patients with rectal cancer who are candidates for curative resection, robotic mesorectal excision is associated with lower complication rates, shorter length of stay, and equivalent oncologic outcomes, compared with open mesorectal excision.

Assessing tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer with rectoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT: results from a prospective series.

INTRODUCTION: rectoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT as a diagnostic algorithm for the assessment of tumor response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is very useful. MATERIAL AND METHODS: this was a prospective longitudinal study in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant CRT. Patients were assessed after CRT completion with a digital rectal examination, proctoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Patients were subdivided as clinical (cCR) or radiologic (rCR) responders and non-responders according to tumor response. Clinical and radiological re-assessment was compared with the surgical specimen. Pathological tumor regression (pCR) grade was determined according to Mandard's classification. Of the 68 patients included, 15 (22 %) presented pCR in the surgical specimen and tumor persistence (non-PCR) was detected in the remaining 53 (78 %). Clinical assessment (DRE+ rectoscopy) identified 15 patients as cCR and 53 as non-cCR, two were false positives and two were false negatives. The overall accuracy was 94 %. 18F-FDG PET/CT identified 18 patients as rCR and 50 as non-rCR, one was a false positive and four were false negatives. The overall accuracy was 92 %. A combination of clinical findings and 18F-FDG PET/CT resulted in an accuracy of 96 %. The combination of clinical findings + 18F-FDG PET/CT was able to correctly identify all cases of pCR, with the exception of one case that presented a tumor regression of 80 %. In this series, 18F-PET-CT and clinical assessment had excellent accuracies in differentiating PCR from non-PCR after CRT completion. PET-CT combined with clinical assessment had a better accuracy than both modalities independently. 18F-FDG PET/CT is a valid tool that complements the clinical assessment of tumor response.

Hemobilia as a Complication of Transhepatic Percutaneous Biliary Drainage: a Rare Indication for Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration.

BACKGROUND: Hemobilia is the presence of blood in the biliary tree and is a frequent complication after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD).1 Most of these episodes are self-limited; nevertheless, in less than 5% of cases, hemobilia is clinically significant, requiring an intervention (hepatic artery embolization, stenting, or percutaneous thrombin injection).2,3 Adequate treatment requires control of hemorrhage and restoration of bile flow. Surgery is the last resort and is indicated when the other modalities fail. METHODS: A 65-year-old man with multiple comorbidities was admitted with cholangitis. The patient underwent PTBD (Figure 1) but had persistent cholestasis. Thus, he underwent endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in which a plastic stent was misplaced within the common bile duct (CBD) and could not be removed (Figure 2). Afterwards, as the patient had persistently high bilirubin levels and the previously placed stent was malpositioned, the decision was made to proceed with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and CBD exploration. RESULTS: The operation was performed with choledocoscope guidance, and the CBD was closed over a T-tube. The operative time was 280 min. Postoperative course was uneventful; the T-tube was clamped 1 week after discharge. Four weeks postoperatively, the T-tube cholangiogram showed a patent extrahepatic biliary tree with no filling defects (Figure 3). The T-tube was then removed. CONCLUSIONS: Biliary obstruction secondary to hemobilia is a rare occurrence after PTBD. Surgical CBD exploration is required when conservative management and endoscopic treatment fail and can be done successfully through a minimally invasive approach.

Early experience with urgent robotic subtotal colectomy for severe acute ulcerative colitis has comparable perioperative outcomes to laparoscopic surgery.

It has been established that patients undergoing subtotal colectomy for UC benefit from a minimally invasive approach, despite the longer operating times associated with laparoscopic surgery when compared to open surgery (Andersson and Söderholm in Dig Dis 27(3):335-340, 2009; Telem et al. in Surg Endosc 24(7):1616-1620, 2010; Wu et al. in Int J Colorectal Dis 25(8):949-957, 2010). Our objective is to present our early experience with urgent robotic subtotal colectomy (RSTC) and compare them to a matched cohort of patients who underwent urgent laparoscopic subtotal colectomy (LSTC). A prospectively maintained institutional database was queried. Six RSTC patients and 13 LSTC patients were identified from 2015 to 2017. There was no difference in ASA score, body mass index, preoperative steroid use, c. difficile infection, or inflammatory markers between the groups. All patients in the robotic group and eight patients in the laparoscopic group received preoperative biologics. Neither group had intraoperative complications, open conversions, or 30-day mortality recorded. Robotic STC took 29 min longer (323.0 vs. 294.0 min, p = 0.3). There was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (80 ml vs. 75 ml p = 0.9). There were six postoperative complications (46%) in the laparoscopic group and 1 (20%) in the robotic group. Of these 23% (3/13) for LSTC and 0% (0/5) for RSTC were Grade III or higher. Two laparoscopic and 0 robotic patients required reoperation. The RSTC group had earlier stoma function (1.4 ± 0.8 days vs. 2 ± 1.3 days) and shorter LOS (3.4 ± 2 vs. 4.6 ± 3.2) than the LSTC group, but these did not reach statistical significance. In conclusion, urgent robotic subtotal colectomy for UC is safe and offers technical advantages.

Assessment of the Value of Comorbidity Indices for Risk Adjustment in Colorectal Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Comorbidity indices (CIs) are widely used in retrospective studies. We investigated the value of commonly used CIs in risk adjustment for postoperative complications after colorectal surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing colectomy without stoma for colonic neoplasia at a single institution from 2009 to 2014 were included. Four CIs were calculated or obtained for each patient, using administrative data: Charlson-Deyo (CCI-D), Charlson-Romano (CCI-R), Elixhauser Comorbidity Score, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Outcomes of interest in the 90-day postoperative period were any surgical complication, surgical site infection (SSI), Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade 3 or higher complication, anastomotic leak or abscess, and nonroutine discharge. Base models were created for each outcome based on significant bivariate associations. Logistic regression models were constructed for each outcome using base models alone, and each index as an additional covariate. Models were also compared using the DeLong and Clarke-Pearson method for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, with the CCI-D as the reference. RESULTS: Overall, 1813 patients were included. Postoperative complications were reported in 756 (42%) patients. Only 9% of patients had a CD grade 3 or higher complication, and 22.8% of patients developed an SSI. Multivariable modeling showed equivalent performance of the base model and the base model augmented by the CIs for all outcomes. The ROC curves for the four indices were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of CIs added little to the base models, and all CIs performed similarly well. Our study suggests that CIs do not adequately risk-adjust for complications after colorectal surgery.

Role of the Interval from Completion of Neoadjuvant Therapy to Surgery in Postoperative Morbidity in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Increasing the interval from completion of neoadjuvant therapy to surgery beyond 8 weeks is associated with increased response of rectal cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. However, reports are conflicting on whether extending the time to surgery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. METHODS: Patients who presented with a tumor within 15 cm of the anal verge in 2009-2015 were grouped according to the interval between completion of neoadjuvant therapy and surgery: < 8 weeks, 8-12 weeks, and 12-16 weeks. RESULTS: Among 607 patients, the surgery was performed at < 8 weeks in 317 patients, 8-12 weeks in 229 patients, and 12-16 weeks in 61 patients. Patients who underwent surgery at 8-12 weeks and patients who underwent surgery at < 8 weeks had comparable rates of complications (37% and 44%, respectively). Univariable analysis identified male sex, earlier date of diagnosis, tumor location within 5 cm of the anal verge, open operative approach, abdominoperineal resection, and use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy alone to be associated with higher rates of complications. In multivariable analysis, male sex, tumor location within 5 cm of the anal verge, open operative approach, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy administered alone were independently associated with the presence of a complication. The interval between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery was not an independent predictor of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Delaying surgery beyond 8 weeks from completion of neoadjuvant therapy does not appear to increase surgical morbidity in rectal cancer patients.

Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

IMPORTANCE: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy aims to spare patients with rectal cancer unnecessary resection. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcomes of WW among patients with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective case series analysis conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in New York included patients who received a diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2006, and January 31, 2015. The median follow-up was 43 months. Data analyses were conducted from June 1, 2016, to October 1, 2018. EXPOSURES: Patients had a clinical complete response after completing neoadjuvant therapy and agreed to a WW strategy of active surveillance and possible salvage surgery (n = 113), or patients underwent total mesorectal excision and were found to have a pathologic complete response (pCR) at resection (n = 136). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analyses of local regrowth and 5-year rates of overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Compared with the 136 patients in the pCR group, the 113 patients in the WW group were older (median [range], 67.2 [32.1-90.9] vs 57.3 [25.0-87.9] years, P < .001) with cancers closer to the anal verge (median [range] height from anal verge, 5.5 [0.0-15.0] vs 7.0 [0.0-13.0] cm). All 22 local regrowths in the WW group were detected on routine surveillance and treated by salvage surgery (20 total mesorectal excisions plus 2 transanal excisions). Pelvic control after salvage surgery was maintained in 20 of 22 patients (91%). No pelvic recurrences occurred in the pCR group. Rectal preservation was achieved in 93 of 113 patients (82%) in the WW group (91 patients with no local regrowths plus 2 patients with local regrowths salvaged with transanal excision). At 5 years, overall survival was 73% (95% CI, 60%-89%) in the WW group and 94% (95% CI, 90%-99%) in the pCR group; disease-free survival was 75% (95% CI, 62%-90%) in the WW group and 92% (95% CI, 87%-98%) in the pCR group; and disease-specific survival was 90% (95% CI, 81%-99%) in the WW group and 98% (95% CI, 95%-100%) in the pCR group. A higher rate of distant metastasis was observed among patients in the WW group who had local regrowth vs those who did not have local regrowth (36% vs 1%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A WW strategy for select rectal cancer patients who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy resulted in excellent rectal preservation and pelvic tumor control; however, in the WW group, worse survival was noted along with a higher incidence of distant progression in patients with local regrowth vs those without local regrowth.

Pelvic MRI after induction chemotherapy and before long-course chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer: What are the imaging findings?

OBJECTIVES: To determine the appearance of rectal cancer on MRI after oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (ICT) and make a preliminary assessment of MRI's value in predicting response to total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT). METHODS: In this IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant, retrospective study between 1 January 2010-20 October 2014, pre- and post-ICT tumour T2 volume, relative T2 signal intensity (rT2SI), node size, signal intensity and border characteristics were assessed in 63 patients (65 tumours) by three readers. The strength of association between the reference standard of histopathological percent tumour response and tumour volume change, rT2SI and lymph node characteristics was assessed with Spearman's correlation coefficient and Wilcoxon's rank sum test. Cox regression was used to assess association between DFS and radiological measures. RESULTS: Change in T2 volume was not associated with TNT response. Change in rT2SI showed correlation with TNT response for one reader only using selective regions of interest (ROIs) and borderline correlation with response using total volume ROI. There was a significant negative correlation between baseline and post-ICT node size and TNT response (r = -0.25, p = 0.05; r = -0.35, p = 0.005, readers 1 and 2, respectively). Both baseline and post-induction median node sizes were significantly smaller in complete responders (p = 0.03, 0.001; readers 1 and 2, respectively). Change in largest baseline node size and decrease in post-ICT node signal heterogeneity were associated with 100% tumour response (p = 0.04). Nodal sizes at baseline and post-ICT MRI correlated with DFS. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing post-ICT MRI, tumour volume did not correlate with TNT response, but decreased lymph node sizes were significantly associated with complete response to TNT as well as DFS. Relative T2SI showed borderline correlation with TNT response. KEY POINTS: • MRI-based tumour volume after induction chemotherapy and before chemoradiotherapy did not correlate with overall tumour response at the end of all treatment. • Lymph node size after induction chemotherapy and before chemoradiotherapy was strongly associated with complete pathological response after all treatment. • Lymph node sizes at baseline and post-induction chemotherapy MRI correlated with disease-free survival.

Contiguous gene deletion of chromosome 2p16.3-p21 as a cause of Lynch syndrome.

Lynch syndrome is an autosomal dominant condition caused by pathogenic mutations in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Although commonly associated with clinical features such as intellectual disability and congenital anomalies, contiguous gene deletions may also result in cancer predisposition syndromes. We report on a 52-year-old male with Lynch syndrome caused by deletion of chromosome 2p16.3-p21. The patient had intellectual disability and presented with a prostatic adenocarcinoma with an incidentally identified synchronous sigmoid adenocarcinoma that exhibited deficient MMR with an absence of MSH2 and MSH6 protein expression. Family history was unrevealing. Physical exam revealed short stature, brachycephaly with a narrow forehead and short philtrum, brachydactyly of the hands, palmar transverse crease, broad and small feet with hyperpigmentation of the soles. The patient underwent total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis for a pT3N1 sigmoid adenocarcinoma. Germline genetic testing of the MSH2, MSH6, and EPCAM genes revealed full gene deletions. SNP-array based DNA copy number analysis identified a deletion of 4.8 Mb at 2p16.3-p21. In addition to the three Lynch syndrome associated genes, the deleted chromosomal section encompassed genes including NRXN1, CRIPT, CALM2, FBXO11, LHCGR, MCFD2, TTC7A, EPAS1, PRKCE, and 15 others. Contiguous gene deletions have been described in other inherited cancer predisposition syndromes, such as Familial Adenomatous Polyposis. Our report and review of the literature suggests that contiguous gene deletion within the 2p16-p21 chromosomal region is a rare cause of Lynch syndrome, but presents with distinct phenotypic features, highlighting the need for recognition and awareness of this syndromic entity.

Organ-Preserving Strategies for the Management of Near-Complete Responses in Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

In recent years, organ preservation has been considered a feasible alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, the degree of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is variable. A fraction of the patients who did not achieve a complete response had grossly visible tumors. These patients, with clearly incomplete clinical response, need a total mesorectal excision. In addition, some patients with a significant tumor response still have some abnormalities in the bowel wall, such as superficial ulceration or tissue nodularity, which, while not conclusive for the presence of a tumor, are indicative of the possibility of a residual tumor in the bowel wall or in mesorectal lymph nodes. The management of patients with a so-called near-complete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy is controversial. In this article, we will review the clinical and radiological criteria that define a clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy, possible treatment strategies, and follow-up protocols. We will also discuss patient and tumor characteristics that in our opinion can be useful in selecting the most appropriate treatment alternative. Although organ preservation and quality of life are important, the primary goal of treatment for these patients should be local tumor control and long-term survival.

Anorectal Function and Quality of Life in Patients With Early Stage Rectal Cancer Treated With Chemoradiation and Local Excision.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about anorectal function and quality of life after chemoradiation followed by local excision, which is an alternative to total mesorectal excision for selected patients with early rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess anorectal function and health-related quality of life of patients with T2N0 rectal cancer who were treated with an alternative approach. DESIGN: This was a prospective, phase II trial. SETTINGS: The study was multicentric (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z6041). INTERVENTIONS: Patients with stage cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinomas were treated with an oxaliplatin/capecitabine-based chemoradiation regimen followed by local excision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anorectal function and quality of life were assessed at enrollment and 1 year postoperatively with the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Questionnaire. Results were compared, and multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (98%) were evaluated at enrollment and 66 (92%) at 1 year. Compared with baseline, no significant differences were found on Fecal Incontinence Severity Index scores at 1 year. Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life results were significantly worse in the lifestyle (p < 0.001), coping/behavior (p < 0.001), and embarrassment (p = 0.002) domains. There were no differences in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score, but the physical well-being subscale was significantly worse and emotional well-being was improved after surgery. Treatment with the original chemoradiation regimen predicted worse depression/self-perception and embarrassment scores in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life, and male sex was predictive of worse scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score and trial outcome index. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, relatively short follow-up, and absence of information before cancer diagnosis were study limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Chemoradiation followed by local excision had minimal impact on anorectal function 1 year after surgery. Overall quality of life remained stable, with mixed effects on different subscales. This information should be used to counsel patients about expected outcomes.