The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) against computed tomography (CT) in various aspects of local staging in colon cancer patients. This study was a prospective single arm diagnostic accuracy study. All consecutive adult patients with confirmed colon cancer that met the current criteria for surgical resection were considered as eligible. Diagnostic performance assessment included T (T1/T2 vs T3/T4 and < T3ab vs > T3cd) and N (N positive) staging, serosa and retroperitoneal surgical margin (RSM) involvement and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI). Imaging was based on a 3 Tesla MRI system and the evaluation of all sequences (T1, T2 and diffusion-weighted imaging-DWI series) by two independent readers. CT scan was performed in a 128 row multidetector (MD) CT scanner (slice thickness: 1 mm) with intravenous contrast. Pathology report was considered as the gold standard for local staging. Sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated for both observers. MRI displayed a higher diagnostic performance over CT in terms of T1/T2 vs T3/T4 (SE: 100% vs 83.9%, SP: 96.6% vs 81%, AUC: 0.825 vs 0.983, p < 0.001), N positive (p < 0.001) and EMVI (p = 0.023) assessment. An excellent performance of MRI was noted in the T3ab vs T3cd (CT AUCReader1: 0.636, AUCReader2: 0.55 vs MRI AUCReader1: 0.829 AUCReader2 0.846, p = 0.01) and RSM invasion diagnosis. In contrast to these, MRI did not perform well in the identification of serosa invasion. MRI had a higher diagnostic yield than CT in several local staging parameters.
Metastatic colorectal cancer is associated with a rather dismal 5-year overall survival. The liver is the most commonly affected organ. Improved 5-year survival rates after successful hepatic resections for metastases confined to the liver have been reported. Certainly, a hepatectomy that results in an incomplete tumor resection, in terms of leaving macroscopic residual tumor in the future liver remnant, is not associated with survival benefits. However, the prognostic implications of a microscopically positive surgical margin or a clear margin of less than 1 mm (R1) on pathology are debatable. Although it has been a field of extensive research, the relevant literature often reports contradictory results. The purpose of the present study was to define, assess the risk factors for, and, ultimately, analyze the effect that an R1 hepatic resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases might have on local recurrence rates and long-term prognosis by reviewing the relevant literature. Achieving an R0 hepatic resection, optimally with more than 1 mm of clear margin, should always be the goal. However, in the era of the aggressive multimodality treatment of liver metastatic colorectal cancer, an R1 resection might be the cost of increasing the pool of patients finally eligible for resection. The majority of literature reports have highlighted the detrimental effect of R1 resections on local recurrence and overall survival. However, there are indeed studies that degraded the prognostic handicap as a consequence of an R1 resection in selected patients and highlighted the presence of RAS mutations, the response to chemotherapy, and, in general, factors that reflect the biology of the disease as important, if not the determinant, prognostic factors. In these patients, the aggressive disease biology seems to outperform the resection margin status as a prognostic factor, and the recorded differences between R1 and R0 resections are equalized. Properly and accurately defining this patient group is a future challenge in the field of the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastases.
5 September 2022 in Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer
Introduction: Primary sclerosing cholangitis sets the scene for several pathologies of both the intrahepatic and the extrahepatic biliary tree. Surgical treatment, when needed, is almost unanimously summarized in the creation of a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, a procedure with a relatively high associated failure rate. Presentation of case: A 70-year-old male, diagnosed with primary sclerosing cholangitis, was submitted to a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy due to a dominant stricture of the extrahepatic biliary tree. Recurrent episodes of acute cholangitis dictated a workup in the direction of a possible stenosis at the level of the anastomosis. The imaging studies were inconclusive while both the endoscopic and the transhepatic approach failed to assess the status of the anastomosis. A laparotomy, with the intent to revise a high suspicion for stenosis hepaticojejunostomy, was decided. Intraoperatively, a decision to assess the hepaticojejunostomy prior to the scheduled surgical revision, via endoscopy, was made. In this direction, an enterotomy was made on the short jejunal blind loop in order to gain luminal access and an endoscope was propelled through the enterotomy towards the biliary enteric anastomosis. Results: The inspection of the anastomosis under direct endoscopic vision showed no evidences of stenosis and averted an unnecessary, under these circumstances, revision of the anastomosis. Conclusions: The surgical revision of a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy is a highly demanding operation with an increased associated morbidity, and it should be reserved as the final resort in the treatment algorithm. An approach of utilizing surgery to facilitate the endoscopic assessment prior to proceeding to the surgical revision of the anastomosis appears justified.
Background: Breast cancer and gynecological malignancies, including cervical, ovarian, and endometrial cancers, remain leading causes of cancer incidence and mortality among women worldwide. This study investigated hereditary predisposition rates in women diagnosed with breast or gynecological cancer, focusing on the effect of age on pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant detection. We sought to determine whether younger age at diagnosis should be used as a criterion for patient selection for genetic testing. Methods: A total of 9084 consecutive females with breast cancer or gynecological tumors underwent NGS-based genetic testing (53 cancer-relevant genes) at Genekor laboratory from 2020-2026. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated factors associated with P/LP variant detection, adjusting for tumor type and family history. Results: Overall P/LP prevalence was approximately 20% (one in five patients), with tumor-specific rates of 19.24% in breast cancer, 27.59% in ovarian cancer, and 26.67% in endometrial cancer. P/LP prevalence declined significantly with age from 24.37% in patients <40 years to 15.90% in those ≥70 years, while VUS remained stable (40-43%). P/LP patients had earlier diagnosis (median 45 vs 46 years, p<0.001), driven predominantly by high-risk genes (13.87% in <40y vs 7.11% in ≥70y). BRCA1 showed stronger age enrichment than BRCA2 (8.14% vs 3.16% in <40y; median diagnosis 43 vs 45 years). Age remained independently associated with P/LP detection in multivariable analysis, with an 18% reduction in odds per 10-year increase for any P/LP (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.86) and a stronger 28% reduction for high-risk variants (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.67-0.78). Family history also independently predicted P/LP detection (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.19-1.66). Conclusions: While younger patients have a higher prevalence of high-risk variants, clinically actionable findings were identified across all age groups, including patients ≥70 years These findings indicate that focusing on age to determine eligibility for genetic testing is insufficient. Expanding testing accessibility to individuals regardless of their age at diagnosis may enhance the identification of genetic cancer risk and optimize patient management.
Background: Breast cancer and gynecological malignancies, including cervical, ovarian, and endometrial cancers, remain leading causes of cancer incidence and mortality among women worldwide. This study investigated hereditary predisposition rates in women diagnosed with breast or gynecological cancer, focusing on the effect of age on germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant detection. We sought to determine whether younger age at diagnosis should be used as a criterion for patient selection for genetic testing. Methods: A total of 9084 consecutive females with breast cancer or gynecological tumors underwent germline NGS-based genetic testing (52 cancer-relevant genes) at Genekor laboratory from 2020–2026. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated factors associated with P/LP variant detection, adjusting for tumor type and family history. Results: Overall P/LP prevalence was approximately 20% (one in five patients), with tumor-specific rates of 19.24% in breast cancer, 27.59% in ovarian cancer, and 26.67% in endometrial cancer. P/LP prevalence declined significantly with age from 24.37% in patients <40 years to 15.90% in those ≥70 years, while Variants of Uncertain Significance (VUS) remained stable (40–43%). P/LP patients had earlier diagnosis (median 45 vs. 46 years, p < 0.001), driven predominantly by high-risk genes (13.87% in <40 y vs. 7.11% in ≥70 y). BRCA1 showed stronger age enrichment than BRCA2 (8.14% vs. 3.16% in <40 y; median diagnosis 43 vs. 45 years). Age remained independently associated with P/LP detection in multivariable analysis, with an 18% reduction in odds per 10-year increase for any P/LP (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.78–0.86) and a stronger 28% reduction for high-risk variants (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.67–0.78). Family history also independently predicted P/LP detection (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.19–1.66). Conclusions: Although derived from a referral-based (and thus selected) population, these findings show that while younger patients have a higher prevalence of high-risk P/LP variants, clinically actionable findings are present across all age groups, including those ≥70 years. These results suggest that reliance on age alone to determine eligibility for genetic testing may be insufficient. Broadening access to testing beyond strict age-based criteria could improve the identification of hereditary cancer risk and inform patient management, although further evaluation in less selected populations is warranted.