In patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM), the choice of surgical technique and resection margin are the only variables that are under the surgeon’s direct control and may influence oncologic outcomes. Thus, optimization of these variables may have direct therapeutic implications. This may explain why there have been numerous attempts to identify the optimal margin width. However, there is no consensus on which is optimal.^1-5 Furthermore, these studies all recommend a single margin width for all patients with CRLM. This approach assumes that the effect of margin width on survival is independent of other patient characteristics. However, recent studies suggest that margin status may have a variable effect in patient subpopulations.^6,7

Background/Aim: Our aim was to develop an animal model of the precancerous stages of colitis-associated carcinogenesis by modifying the established azoxymethane/dextran sulfate sodium (AOM/DSS) protocol. Materials and Methods: Six mice were treated with varying cycles of DSS following AOM administration as above (group 1: three mice received three 5-day cycles of 3.0% DSS and group 2: three mice received three 7-day cycles of 2.5% DSS; every cycle was followed by a 2-week rest period) and were sacrificed on day 84 of the experiment. By contrast, three female C57BL6 mice (group 3) were treated with a single intraperitoneal dose (10 mg/kg of body weight) of AOM followed by three 5-day cycles of oral 2.5% DSS, with each cycle interrupted by a 2-week rest period. The mice of this group were sacrificed at 60 days. Results: In groups 1 and 2, cancer was noted in five out of the six mice. In group 3, adenomas with dysplastic lesions were noted in all of the mice, but none had developed adenocarcinoma. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the administration of three 5-day cycles of 2.5% DSS following an initial dose of AOM may successfully induce adenoma formation without the concurrent presence of carcinoma in female C57BL6 mice that are sacrificed on experimental day 60. In turn, this modification of the widely used AOM/DSS protocol may constitute a novel approach for investigating colitis-related colonic adenomas.

Precision surgery for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) includes optimal selection of both the patient and surgery. Initial attempts of using clinical risk scores to identify patients for whom technically feasible surgery is oncologically futile failed. Since then, patient selection for single‐stage hepatectomy followed three distinct approaches, all of which incorporated biomarkers. The BRAF V600E mutation, the G12V KRAS variant, and the triple mutation of RAS, TP53, and SMAD4 appear to be the most promising, but none can be used in isolation to deny surgery in otherwise resectable cases. Combining biomarkers with clinicopathologic factors that predict poor prognosis may be used to select patients for surgery, but external validation and matched analyses with medically treated counterparts are needed. Patient selection for special surgical procedures (two‐stage hepatectomy [TSH], Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for staged hepatectomy [ALPPS], and liver transplant [LT]) has been recently refined. Specifically, BRAF mutations and right‐sided laterality have been proposed as separate contraindications to LT. A similar association of right‐sided laterality, particularly when combined with RAS mutations, with very poor outcomes has been observed for ALPPS and has been suggested as a biologic contraindication. Data are scarce for TSH but RAS mutations may portend very poor survival following TSH completion. The selection of the best single‐stage hepatectomy (optimal margin and type of resection) based on biomarkers remains debated, although there is some evidence that RAS may play a significant role. Lastly, although there are currently no criteria to select among the three special techniques based on their efficacy or appropriateness in different settings, RAS mutational status may be used to select patients for TSH, while right‐sided tumor in conjunction with a RAS mutation may be a contraindication to LT and ALPPS.

Despite the overall poor prognosis of pancreatic cancer there is heterogeneity in clinical courses of tumors not assessed by conventional risk stratification. This yields the need of additional markers for proper assessment of prognosis and multimodal clinical management. We provide a proof of concept study evaluating the feasibility of Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) to identify specific peptide signatures linked to prognostic parameters of pancreatic cancer. On 18 patients with exocrine pancreatic cancer after tumor resection, MALDI imaging analysis was performed additional to histopathological assessment. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to explore discrimination of peptide signatures of prognostic histopathological features and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) to identify which specific m/z values are the most discriminative between the prognostic subgroups of patients. Out of 557 aligned m/z values discriminate peptide signatures for the prognostic histopathological features lymphatic vessel invasion (pL, 16 m/z values, eight proteins), nodal metastasis (pN, two m/z values, one protein) and angioinvasion (pV, 4 m/z values, two proteins) were identified. These results yield proof of concept that MALDI-MSI of pancreatic cancer tissue is feasible to identify peptide signatures of prognostic relevance and can augment risk assessment.

In patients presenting with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases, the disease burden related to the liver metastasis is the driving cause of limited longevity and, eventually, risk of death. Surgical resection is the potentially curative treatment for colorectal cancer liver metastases. In the synchronous setting where both the liver metastases and the primary tumor are resectable with a relative low risk, the oncological surgeon and the patient may consider three potential treatment strategies. Firstly, a “staged” or a “simultaneous” surgical approach. Secondly, for a staged strategy, a ‘conventional approach’ will suggest removal of the primary tumor first (either colon or rectal cancer) and plan for liver surgery after recovery from the first operation. A “Liver first” strategy is prioritizing the liver resection before resection of the primary tumor. Planning a surgical trial investigating a two-organ oncological resection with highly variable extent and complexity of resection as well as the potential impact of perioperative chemo(radio)therapy makes it difficult to find the optimal primary endpoint. Here, we suggest running investigational trials with carefully chosen composite endpoints as well as embedded risk-stratification strategies to identify subgroups of patients who may benefit from simultaneous surgery.