Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a significant global health challenge. Notably, the risk of CRC escalates with age, with the majority of cases occurring in those over the age of 65. Despite recent progress in tailoring treatments for early and advanced CRC, there is a lack of prospective data to guide the management of older patients, who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. This article reviews the contemporary landscape of managing older individuals with CRC, highlighting recent advancements and persisting challenges. The role of comprehensive geriatric assessment is explored. Opportunities for treatment escalation/de-escalation, with consideration of the older adult’s fitness level. are reviewed in the neoadjuvant, surgical, adjuvant, and metastatic settings of colon and rectal cancers. Immunotherapy is shown to be an effective treatment option in older adults who have CRC with microsatellite instability. Promising new technologies such as circulating tumor DNA and recent phase III trials adding later-line systemic therapy options are discussed. Clinical recommendations based on the data available are summarized. We conclude that deliberate efforts to include older individuals in future colorectal cancer trials are essential to better guide the management of these patients in this rapidly evolving field.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy with rising incidence and poor outcomes. This review examines recent advancements in locoregional therapies for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, focusing on external beam radiotherapy, transarterial radioembolization (TARE), hepatic artery infusion pump (HAIP) chemotherapy, and liver transplantation. Stereotactic body radiation therapy and proton beam therapy have shown promise in achieving local control and improving survival. TARE, with personalized dosimetry, has demonstrated encouraging results in select patient populations. HAIP chemotherapy, primarily studied using floxuridine, has yielded impressive survival outcomes in phase II trials. Liver transplantation, once contraindicated, is now being reconsidered for carefully selected patients with localized disease. While these locoregional approaches show potential, randomized controlled trials comparing them to standard systemic therapy are lacking. Patient selection remains crucial, with factors such as liver function, tumor burden, and molecular profile influencing treatment decisions. Ongoing research aims to optimize treatment sequencing, explore combination strategies with systemic therapies, and refine phenotype identification and patient selection criteria. As the landscape of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma management evolves, a multidisciplinary approach is essential to tailor treatment strategies and improve outcomes for patients with this challenging disease.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics, clinical outcomes, and resource use of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) treated with first-line (1L) atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A+B) at five United States (US) institutions: the Mayo Clinic, Houston Methodist, Moffitt Cancer Center, Mays Cancer Center, and University of Arizona. Methods: Treating oncologists extracted data from medical charts of patients with uHCC who were treated with A+B after 1 January 2019. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method for the overall cohort and for a “trial-like” subgroup with characteristics similar to those in the IMbrave150 trial (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status [ECOG PS] 0–1, Child–Pugh [CP] class A, albumin–bilirubin grade 1–2). Results: Of the 300 patients in the overall cohort (median age of 68 years; 12% ECOG PS ≥ 2; 73% CP A; 26% CP B; median follow-up of 8.7 months), the median rwPFS was 6.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.8, 8.4) months, and the median OS was 14.4 (95% CI: 12.3, 18.2) months. In the trial-like subgroup (n = 194), the median rwPFS was 8.8 (95% CI: 7.6, 12.1) months and the median OS was 19.5 (95% CI: 14.6, 24.7) months. A significantly lower proportion of patients with CP A compared with CP B (39.7% vs. 73.4%) experienced hospitalization within one year of A+B initiation, whereas hospitalizations due to treatment-related adverse events were similar. Conclusions: This study provides insights into the real-world effectiveness of 1L A+B in a diverse US patient cohort, with results from trial-like patients supporting the reproducible efficacy of A+B in clinical practice.

(1) Background: Local therapies offer a potentially curative approach for patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). An evidence-based consensus recommendation for systemic therapy following definitive locoregional therapy is lacking. Tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) might provide information to help guide management in this setting. (2) Methods: A multi-institutional retrospective study was conducted, including patients with CRC that underwent curative-intent locoregional therapy to an isolated site of metastatic disease, followed by tumor-informed ctDNA assessment. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank tests were used to compare disease-free survival based on ctDNA results. ctDNA test performance was compared to carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test results using McNemar’s test. (3) Results: Our study cohort consisted of 87 patients treated with locoregional interventions who underwent ctDNA testing. The initial ctDNA test post-intervention was positive in 28 patients and negative in 59 patients. The median follow-up time was 14.0 months. Detectable ctDNA post-intervention was significantly associated with early disease recurrence, with a median disease-free survival (DFS) of 6.63 months compared to 21.30 months in ctDNA-negative patients (p < 0.001). ctDNA detected a numerically higher proportion of recurrences than CEA (p < 0.097). Post-intervention systemic therapy was not associated with improved DFS (p = 0.745). (4) Conclusions: ctDNA results are prognostically important in oligometastatic CRC, and further prospective studies are urgently needed to define its role in guiding clinical decisions.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a significant global health challenge. Notably, the risk of CRC escalates with age, with the majority of cases occurring in those above the age of 65. Despite recent progress in tailoring treatments for early and advanced CRC, there is a lack of prospective data to guide the management of older patients, who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. This article reviews the contemporary landscape of managing older individuals with CRC, highlighting recent advancements and persisting challenges. The role of comprehensive geriatric assessment is explored. Opportunities for treatment escalation/de-escalation, with consideration of the older adult’s fitness level are reviewed in the neoadjuvant, surgical, adjuvant and metastatic settings of colon and rectal cancers. Immunotherapy is shown as an effective option treatment in older adults that have CRC with microsatellite instability. Promising new technologies such as circulating tumor DNA and recent phase III trials adding later line systemic therapy options are discussed. Clinical recommendations based on the data available are summarized. We conclude that deliberate efforts to include older individuals in future colorectal cancer trials are essential to better guide the management of these patients in this rapidly evolving field.

Background: Peritoneal metastasis represents an aggressive disease pattern in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), traditionally associated with poor survival and limited therapeutic options. Emerging intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies—including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal paclitaxel (NIPEC/IP-PTX), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)—have been investigated to improve local tumor control and survival outcomes. Methods: We systematically reviewed published studies evaluating HIPEC, NIPEC/IP-PTX, and PIPAC in PDAC, including adjuvant, cytoreductive, and palliative settings. Study characteristics, feasibility, perioperative outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results: Across modalities, intraperitoneal treatment strategies demonstrated acceptable feasibility and safety profiles in appropriately selected patients. Adjuvant HIPEC following pancreatectomy showed reduced local–regional recurrence signals in limited cohorts. CRS + HIPEC among patients with isolated peritoneal metastases yielded encouraging multi-year survival in highly selected candidates achieving complete cytoreduction. NIPEC/IP-PTX demonstrated favorable ascites control, symptom relief, and potential conversion to resection in select patients. PIPAC was primarily used in unresectable, heavily pretreated, palliative peritoneal metastasis settings, with goals centered on disease stabilization, histologic regression, and symptom control rather than curative intent. Conclusions: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies in PDAC appear feasible with signals of meaningful clinical benefit in select settings. While CRS + HIPEC may benefit carefully selected metastatic patients, NIPEC/IP-PTX and PIPAC hold value primarily in symptom control and disease stabilization. Larger prospective trials are needed to define patient selection, optimize treatment protocols, and clarify survival benefit.