PD-1 plus CTLA-4 blockade is highly effective in advanced-stage, mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient (dMMR) colorectal cancers, yet not in MMR-proficient (pMMR) tumors. We postulated a higher efficacy of ...neoadjuvant immunotherapy in early-stage colon cancers. In the exploratory NICHE study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03026140), patients with dMMR or pMMR tumors received a single dose of ipilimumab and two doses of nivolumab before surgery, the pMMR group with or without celecoxib. The primary objective was safety and feasibility; 40 patients with 21 dMMR and 20 pMMR tumors were treated, and 3 patients received nivolumab monotherapy in the safety run-in. Treatment was well tolerated and all patients underwent radical resections without delays, meeting the primary endpoint. Of the patients who received ipilimumab + nivolumab (20 dMMR and 15 pMMR tumors), 35 were evaluable for efficacy and translational endpoints. Pathological response was observed in 20/20 (100%; 95% exact confidence interval (CI): 86-100%) dMMR tumors, with 19 major pathological responses (MPRs, ≤10% residual viable tumor) and 12 pathological complete responses. In pMMR tumors, 4/15 (27%; 95% exact CI: 8-55%) showed pathological responses, with 3 MPRs and 1 partial response. CD8
PD-1
T cell infiltration was predictive of response in pMMR tumors. These data indicate that neoadjuvant immunotherapy may have the potential to become the standard of care for a defined group of colon cancer patients when validated in larger studies with at least 3 years of disease-free survival data.
Main Recommendations
ESGE recommends that individuals with hereditary gastrointestinal polyposis syndromes should be surveilled in dedicated units that provide monitoring of compliance and endoscopic ...performance measures.
Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence, level of agreement 90 %.
ESGE recommends performing esophagogastroduodenoscopy, small-bowel examination, and/or colonoscopy earlier than the planned surveillance procedure if a patient is symptomatic.
Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence, level of agreement 100 %.
Summary Background Screening for colorectal cancer is widely recommended, but the preferred strategy remains unidentified. We aimed to compare participation and diagnostic yield between screening ...with colonoscopy and with non-cathartic CT colonography. Methods Members of the general population, aged 50–75 years, and living in the regions of Amsterdam or Rotterdam, identified via the registries of the regional municipal administration, were randomly allocated (2:1) to be invited for primary screening for colorectal cancer by colonoscopy or by CT colonography. Randomisation was done per household with a minimisation algorithm based on age, sex, and socioeconomic status. Invitations were sent between June 8, 2009, and Aug 16, 2010. Participants assigned to CT colonography who were found to have one or more large lesions (≥10 mm) were offered colonoscopy; those with 6–9 mm lesions were offered surveillance CT colonography. The primary outcome was the participation rate, defined as number of invitees undergoing the examination relative to the total number of invitees. Diagnostic yield was calculated as number of participants with advanced neoplasia relative to the total number of invitees. Invitees and screening centre employees were not masked to allocation. This trial is registered in the Dutch trial register, number NTR1829. Findings 1276 (22%) of 5924 colonoscopy invitees participated, compared with 982 (34%) of 2920 CT colonography invitees (relative risk RR 1·56, 95% CI 1·46–1·68; p<0·0001). Of the participants in the colonoscopy group, 111 (9%) had advanced neoplasia of whom seven (<1%) had a carcinoma. Of CT colonography participants, 84 (9%) were offered colonoscopy, of whom 60 (6%) had advanced neoplasia of whom five (<1%) had a carcinoma; 82 (8%) were offered surveillance. The diagnostic yield for all advanced neoplasia was 8·7 per 100 participants for colonoscopy versus 6·1 per 100 for CT colonography (RR 1·46, 95% CI 1·06–2·03; p=0·02) and 1·9 per 100 invitees for colonoscopy and 2·1 per 100 invitees for CT colonography (RR 0·91, 0·66–2·03; p=0·56). The diagnostic yield for advanced neoplasia of 10 mm or more was 1·5 per 100 invitees for colonoscopy and 2·0 per 100 invitees for CT colonography, respectively (RR 0·74, 95% CI 0·53–1·03; p=0·07). Serious adverse events related to the screening procedure were post-polypectomy bleedings: two in the colonoscopy group and three in the CT colonography group. Interpretation Participation in colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography was significantly better than with colonoscopy, but colonoscopy identified significantly more advanced neoplasia per 100 participants than did CT colonography. The diagnostic yield for advanced neoplasia per 100 invitees was similar for both strategies, indicating that both techniques can be used for population-based screening for colorectal cancer. Other factors such as cost-effectiveness and perceived burden should be taken into account when deciding which technique is preferable. Funding Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Centre for Translational Molecular Medicine, and the Nuts Ohra Foundation.
Cancer immunotherapies have shown substantial clinical activity for a subset of patients with epithelial cancers. Still, technological platforms to study cancer T-cell interactions for individual ...patients and understand determinants of responsiveness are presently lacking. Here, we establish and validate a platform to induce and analyze tumor-specific T cell responses to epithelial cancers in a personalized manner. We demonstrate that co-cultures of autologous tumor organoids and peripheral blood lymphocytes can be used to enrich tumor-reactive T cells from peripheral blood of patients with mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer and non-small-cell lung cancer. Furthermore, we demonstrate that these T cells can be used to assess the efficiency of killing of matched tumor organoids. This platform provides an unbiased strategy for the isolation of tumor-reactive T cells and provides a means by which to assess the sensitivity of tumor cells to T cell-mediated attack at the level of the individual patient.
Display omitted
•Induction of tumor-reactive T cells by co-culture of PBMCs and tumor organoids•Induced T cell populations do not recognize healthy organoids or tissue•This platform can be used to assess the efficiency of T-cell-mediated tumor killing
A modified patient-derived tumor organoids system allows the expansion of tumor-specific T cells from blood for personalized analysis of their anti-cancer properties.
Sarcopenia in patients with cancer is associated with adverse outcomes such as shorter survival. However, there exists little evidence regarding the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with ...metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs). Patients with a histologically confirmed newly diagnosed metastatic GEP-NET between 2006 and 2018, CT scan, and anthropometric data at diagnosis were included in this study. CT scans were analysed for the presence of sarcopenia and correlated with overall survival (OS). In total, 183 patients, 87 male (48%), with a median age of 62 years (IQR 52-68 years), were included. In 44 patients (24%), there was a pancreas NET, and in 136 patients, there was a small bowel NET (74%). Sarcopenia was present in 128 patients (69%) and unrelated to BMI (median 25.1). There were significant survival differences between patients with pancreatic and small bowel NETs at 86 vs. 141 months, respectively (
= 0.04). For patients with pancreatic NETs, the presence of sarcopenia was independently associated with shorter OS (HR 3.79 95% CI 1.1-13.03,
-value 0.035). A high prevalence of sarcopenia at the time of diagnosis of a metastatic GEP-NET was seen and associated with worse OS in patients with pancreatic NETs. Further research should focus on how to reverse sarcopenia and its impact on OS and/or quality of life.
Accurate endoscopic differentiation would enable to resect and discard small and diminutive colonic lesions, thereby increasing cost-efficiency. Current classification systems based on narrow band ...imaging (NBI), however, do not include neoplastic sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps). We aimed to develop and validate a new classification system for endoscopic differentiation of adenomas, hyperplastic polyps and SSA/Ps <10 mm.
We developed the Workgroup serrAted polypS and Polyposis (WASP) classification, combining the NBI International Colorectal Endoscopic classification and criteria for differentiation of SSA/Ps in a stepwise approach. Ten consultant gastroenterologists predicted polyp histology, including levels of confidence, based on the endoscopic aspect of 45 polyps, before and after participation in training in the WASP classification. After 6 months, the same endoscopists predicted polyp histology of a new set of 50 polyps, with a ratio of lesions comparable to daily practice.
The accuracy of optical diagnosis was 0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.71) at baseline, which improved to 0.79 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.86, p<0.001) after training. For polyps diagnosed with high confidence the accuracy was 0.73 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.82), which improved to 0.87 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.95, p<0.01). The accuracy of optical diagnosis after 6 months was 0.76 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.80), increasing to 0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.88) considering high confidence diagnosis. The combined negative predictive value with high confidence of diminutive neoplastic lesions (adenomas and SSA/Ps together) was 0.91 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96).
We developed and validated the first integrative classification method for endoscopic differentiation of small and diminutive adenomas, hyperplastic polyps and SSA/Ps. In a still image evaluation setting, introduction of the WASP classification significantly improved the accuracy of optical diagnosis overall as well as SSA/P in particular, which proved to be sustainable after 6 months.
OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND:Watch-and-wait approach in rectal cancer relies on the identification of a clinical complete response (CR) after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. This is mainly performed by ...rectal examination, magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopy. Endoscopy has been less well studied, and the objective of the study is to assess the diagnostic value of endoscopy and the predictive value of endoscopic features for the identification of CR.
PATIENTS AND METHODS:A total of 161 patients with primary rectal cancer undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy for response assessment after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy between January 2012 and December 2015 at a single institution were evaluated retrospectively. Three independent readers scored endoscopic features and a confidence level score for a CR. Diagnostic performance of endoscopy and positive predictive value (PPV) of endoscopic features for a CR were calculated. If available, biopsy results were revealed to the reader and a change in confidence level was noted. Reference standard was histology after surgery, or long-term outcome in a watch-and-wait policy.
RESULTS:Median time to endoscopy was 9 (interquartile range 8–12) weeks. Area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value for a CR were 0.80 to 0.84, 72% to 94%, 61% to 85%, 63% to 78% and 80% to 89%, respectively. A flat scar was the most predictive feature of a CR (PPV 70%–80%). The PPV of small flat ulcers and large flat ulcers were 40% to 50% and 29% to 33%, respectively. The addition of biopsy results led to a significant change in confidence level score in 4% to 13% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS:More than 70% of the patients with a luminal CR after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer can be identified by endoscopy at ±9 weeks. Together with findings on digital rectal examination (DRE) and magnetic resonance imaging, specific endoscopic features can be used to select patients for an extended observation period to select for organ preservation.
The scientific data to guide the management of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) are sparse. The available evidence has been reviewed and discussed by diverse medical specialists in the field of PJS to ...update the previous guideline from 2010 and formulate a revised practical guideline for colleagues managing PJS patients. Methods: Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane. Evidence levels and recommendation strengths were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A Delphi process was followed, with consensus being reached when ≥80% of the voting guideline committee members agreed. Recommendations and statements: The only recent guidelines available were for gastrointestinal and pancreatic management. These were reviewed and endorsed after confirming that no more recent relevant papers had been published. Literature searches were performed for additional questions and yielded a variable number of relevant papers depending on the subject addressed. Additional recommendations and statements were formulated. Conclusions: A decade on, the evidence base for recommendations remains poor, and collaborative studies are required to provide better data about this rare condition. Within these restrictions, multisystem, clinical management recommendations for PJS have been formulated.
The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely employed for colorectal cancer screening. However, its sensitivity for advanced precursor lesions remains suboptimal. The multitarget FIT (mtFIT), ...measuring haemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2, has demonstrated enhanced sensitivity for advanced neoplasia, especially advanced adenomas, at equal specificity to FIT. This study aimed to prospectively validate and investigate the clinical utlitity of mtFIT versus FIT in a setting of population-based colorectal cancer screening.
Individuals aged 55–75 years and who were eligible for the Dutch national FIT-based colorectal cancer screening programme were invited to submit both a FIT and mtFIT sample collected from the same bowel movement. Positive FIT (47 μg/g haemoglobin cutoff) or mtFIT (based on decision-tree algorithm) led to a colonoscopy referral. The primary outcome was the relative detection rate of mtFIT versus FIT for all advanced neoplasia. Secondary outcomes were the relative detection rates of colorectal cancer, advanced adenoma, and advanced serrated polyps individually and the long-term effect of mtFIT-based versus FIT-based programmatic screening on colorectal cancer incidence, mortality, and cost, determined with microsimulation modelling. The study has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05314309, and is complete.
Between March 25 and Dec 7, 2022, 35 786 individuals were invited to participate in the study, of whom 15 283 (42·7%) consented, and 13 187 (86·3%) of 15 283 provided both mtFIT and FIT samples with valid results. Of the 13 187 participants, 6637 (50·3%) were male and 6550 (49·7%) were female. mtFIT showed a 9·11% (95% CI 8·62–9·61) positivity rate and 2·27% (95% CI 2·02–2·54) detection rate for advanced neoplasia, compared with a positivity rate of 4·08% (3·75–4·43) and a detection rate of 1·21% (1·03–1·41) for FIT. Detection rates of mtFIT versus FIT were 0·20% (95% CI 0·13–0·29) versus 0·17% (0·11–0·27) for colorectal cancer; 1·64% (1·43–1·87) versus 0·86% (0·72–1·04) for advanced adenoma, and 0·43% (0·33–0·56) versus 0·17% (0·11–0·26) for advanced serrated polyps. Modelling demonstrated that mtFIT-based screening could reduce colorectal cancer incidence by 21% and associated mortality by 18% compared with the current Dutch colorectal cancer screening programme, at feasible costs. Furthermore, at equal positivity rates, mtFIT outperformed FIT in terms of diagnostic yield. At an equally low positivity rate, mtFIT-based screening was predicted to further decrease colorectal cancer incidence by 5% and associated mortality by 4% compared with FIT-based screening.
The higher detection rate of mtFIT for advanced adenoma compared with FIT holds the potential to translate into additional and clinically meaningful long-term colorectal cancer incidence and associated mortality reductions in programmatic colorectal cancer screening.
Stand Up to Cancer, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Digestive Foundation, and Health~Holland.
PDF
