Colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) are synonymously called colorectal cancer (CRC). Based on our experience in basic and clinical research as well as routine work in the field, the term CRC should be abandoned. We analyzed the available data from the literature and results from our multicenter Research Group Oncology of Gastrointestinal Tumors termed FOGT to confirm or reject this hypothesis. Anatomically, the risk of developing RC is four times higher than CC, while physical activity helps to prevent CC but not RC. Obvious differences exist in molecular carcinogenesis, pathology, surgical topography and procedures, and multimodal treatment. Therefore, we conclude that CC is not the same as RC. The term “CRC” should no longer be used as a single entity in basic and clinical research as well as other areas of classification.

The distinct biology of pancreatic cancer with aggressive and early invasive tumor cells, a tumor promoting microenvironment, late diagnosis, and high therapy resistance poses major challenges on clinicians, researchers, and patients. In current clinical practice, a curative approach for pancreatic cancer can only be offered to a minority of patients and even for those patients, the long-term outcome is grim. This bitter combination will eventually let pancreatic cancer rise to the second leading cause of cancer-related mortalities. With surgery being the only curative option, complete tumor resection still remains the center of pancreatic cancer treatment. In recent years, new developments in neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment have emerged. Together with improved perioperative care including complication management, an increasing number of patients have become eligible for tumor resection. Basic research aims to further increase these numbers by new methods of early detection, better tumor modelling and personalized treatment options. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on clinical and biologic features, surgical and non-surgical treatment options, and the improved collaboration of clinicians and basic researchers in pancreatic cancer that will hopefully result in more successful ways of curing pancreatic cancer.

Background: To answer the question whether minimum caseloads need to be stipulated in the German S3 (or any other) guidelines for colorectal cancer, we analyzed the current representative literature. The question is important regarding medical quality as well as health economics and policy. Methods: A literature research was conducted in PubMed for papers concerning ‘colon cancer' (CC), ‘rectal cancer' (RC), and ‘colorectal cancer' (CRC), with ‘results', ‘quality', and ‘mortality' between the years 2000 and 2016 being relevant factors. We graded the recommendations as ‘pro', ‘maybe', or ‘contra' in terms of a significant correlation between hospital volume (HV) or surgeon volume (SV) and treatment quality. We also listed the recommended numbers suggested for HV or SV as minimum caseloads and calculated and discussed the socio-economic impact of setting minimum caseloads for CRC. Results: The correlations of caseloads of hospitals or surgeons turned out to be highly controversial concerning the influence of HV or SV on short- and long-term surgical treatment quality of CRC. Specialized statisticians made the point that the reports in the literature might not use the optimal biometrical analytical/reporting methods. A Dutch analysis showed that if a decision towards minimum caseloads, e.g. >50 for CRC resections, would be made, this would exclude a lot of hospitals with proven good treatment quality and include hospitals with a treatment quality below average. Our economic analysis envisioned that a yearly loss of EUR <830,000 might ensue for hospitals with volumes <50 per year. Conclusions: Caseload (HV, SV) definitely is an inconsistent surrogate parameter for treatment quality in the surgery of CC, RC, or CRC. If used at all, the lowest tolerable numbers but the highest demands for structural, process and result quality in the surgical/interdisciplinary treatment of CC and RC must be imposed and independently controlled. Hospitals fulfilling these demands should be medically and socio-economically preferred concerning the treatment of CC and RC patients.

3608 Background: In this phase III trial (FOGT-2) we studied whether one of the 5-FU modulations with either folinic acid (FA) or Interferon alpha-2a (IFNa) increased overall survival compared to the standard treatment in R0-resected rectal cancer, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) plus levamisole (LEV) for 12 months, plus postoperative radiotherapy (RT). Methods: From 7/92 to 5/03 793 patients with resected rectal cancer stages UICC II (267 pts.) and UICC III (526 pts.) were randomized into three arms and stratified (N-stage, centers). After a postoperative loading course with 5-FU [450mg/ m2 d1–5 (arms A and C)] or 5-FU [450mg/m2 plus folinic acid (Rescuvolin, medac, Hamburg, Germany), 200 mg/ m2 d1–5 (arm B)], LEV was administered orally at 150 mg/d d1–3, q every 2 weeks. 4wks later treatment was continued weekly for up to 52 wks. RT was given over a 6-wks postoperative period in a 3-field technique up to a dose of 45–50,4 Gy in 1,8 Gy fractions 5x/wk with a 20% dose reduction of 5-FU. Arm A (280 pts.) was treated with 5-FU i.v. (450 mg/ m2 at d 1, q 1 w) plus LEV. 5-FU plus LEV was modulated in arm B (291 pts.) with FA (200mg/ m2 d1, q 1 w), and in arm C (222 pts.) with IFNa at 6 million units 3x/week, q 1 w. Arm C was closed early due to toxicity. Results: Toxic events WHO3,4, mainly diarrhea, leukopenia, occurred in 36% of all pts. (A, 31%, B,27%, C, 55%). Discontinuance rates were 34% (all), 33% (A), 31% (B), 39% (C). 80% of all pts. received treatment for at least 6 months. Overall relapse rates were 37% (all), 39% (A), 35% (B) and 37% (C). Tumors relapsed either locally (all: 6%; A, C:6%, B:5%) or distant (all: 26%; A: 27%, B, C: 26%) or both locally and distant (all: 5%; A: 6%, B, C: 5%). Death rates were 32% (all), 33% (A), 28% (B), and 34% (C), with no significant difference among arms in Kaplan-Meier analysis. There were 2 toxic deaths (A, C). Conclusions: Adjuvant postoperative radio-/chemotherapy with 5-FU +/- FA plus LEV for 12 months in more than 700 patients is safe, well tolerated and shows low local recurrence rates. IFNa-modulation of 5-FU (plus LEV) adds toxicity without therapeutic benefit. No significant financial relationships to disclose.