Search

Aim: The aim of this work was to examine the burden of further treatments in patients with colorectal cancer following a decision about lung metastasectomy., Method: Five teams participating in the Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC) study provided details on subsequent local treatments for lung metastases, including the use of chemotherapy. For patients in three groups (no metastasectomy, one metastasectomy or multiple local interventions), baseline factors and selection criteria for additional treatments were examined., Results: The five teams recruited 220 patients between October 2010 and January 2017. No lung metastasectomy was performed in 51 patients, 114 patients had one metastasectomy and 55 patients had multiple local interventions. Selection for initial metastasectomy was associated with nonelevated carcinoembryonic antigen, fewer metastases and no prior liver metastasectomy. These patients also had better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores and lung function at baseline. Four sites provided information on chemotherapy in 139 patients: 79 (57%) had one to five courses of chemotherapy, to a total of 179 courses. The patterns of survival after one or multiple metastasectomy interventions showed evidence of guarantee-time bias contributing to an impression of benefit over no metastasectomy. After repeated metastasectomy, a significantly higher risk of death was observed, with no apparent reduction in chemotherapy usage., Conclusion: Repeated metastasectomy is associated with a higher risk of death without reducing the use of chemotherapy. Continued monitoring without surgery might reassure patients with indolent disease or allow response assessment during systemic treatment. Overall, the carefully collected information from the PulMICC study provides no indication of an important survival benefit from metastasectomy., (© 2021 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: We wanted to examine survival in patients with resected colorectal cancer (CRC) whose lung metastases are or are not resected., Methods: Teams participating in the study of Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC) identified potential candidates for lung metastasectomy and invited their consent to join Stage 1. Baseline data related to CRC and fitness for surgery were collected. Eligible patients were invited to consent for randomization in the PulMiCC randomized controlled trial (Stage 2). Sites were provided with case report forms for non-randomized patients to record adverse events and death at any time. They were all reviewed at 1 year. Baseline and survival data were analysed for the full cohort., Results: Twenty-five clinical sites recruited 512 patients from October 2010 to January 2017. Data collection closed in October 2020. Before analysis, 28 patients with non-CRC lung lesions were excluded and three had withdrawn consent leaving 481. The date of death was known for 292 patients, 136 were alive in 2020 and 53 at earlier time points. Baseline factors and 5-year survival were analysed in three strata: 128 non-randomized patients did not have metastasectomy; 263 had elective metastasectomy; 90 were from the randomized trial. The proportions of solitary metastases for electively operated and non-operated patients were 69% and 35%. Their respective 5-year survivals were 47% and 22%., Conclusion: Survival without metastasectomy was greater than widely presumed. Difference in survival appeared to be largely related to selection. No inference can be drawn about the effect of metastasectomy on survival in this observational study., (© 2021 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Lung metastases from colorectal cancer are resected in selected patients in the belief that this confers a significant survival advantage. It is generally assumed that the 5-year survival of these patients would be near zero without metastasectomy. We tested the clinical effectiveness of this practice in Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC), a randomized, controlled noninferiority trial., Method: Multidisciplinary teams in 14 hospitals recruited patients with resectable lung metastases into a two-arm trial. Randomization was remote and stratified according to site, with minimization for age, sex, primary cancer stage, interval since primary resection, prior liver involvement, number of metastases and carcinoembryonic antigen level. The trial management group was blind to patient allocation until after intention-to-treat analysis., Results: From 2010 to 2016, 93 participants were randomized. These patients were 35-86 years of age and had between one and six lung metastases at a median of 2.7 years after colorectal cancer resection; 29% had prior liver metastasectomy. The patient groups were well matched and the characteristics of these groups were similar to those of observational studies. The median survival after metastasectomy was 3.5 (95% CI: 3.1-6.6) years compared with 3.8 (95% CI: 3.1-4.6) years for controls. The estimated unadjusted hazard ratio for death within 5 years, comparing the metastasectomy group with the control group, was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.56-1.56). Use of chemotherapy or local ablation was infrequent and similar in each group., Conclusion: Patients in the control group (who did not undergo lung metastasectomy) have better survival than is assumed. Survival in the metastasectomy group is comparable with the many single-arm follow-up studies. The groups were well matched with features similar to those reported in case series., (© 2020 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: Malignant pleural mesothelioma incidence continues to rise, with few available evidence-based therapeutic options. Results of previous non-randomised studies suggested that video-assisted thoracoscopic partial pleurectomy (VAT-PP) might improve symptom control and survival. We aimed to compare efficacy in terms of overall survival, and cost, of VAT-PP and talc pleurodesis in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma., Methods: We undertook an open-label, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial in patients aged 18 years or older with any subtype of confirmed or suspected mesothelioma with pleural effusion, recruited from 12 hospitals in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either VAT-PP or talc pleurodesis by computer-generated random numbers, stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer risk category (high vs low). The primary outcome was overall survival at 1 year, analysed by intention to treat (all patients randomly assigned to a treatment group with a final diagnosis of mesothelioma). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00821860., Findings: Between Oct 24, 2003, and Jan 24, 2012, we randomly assigned 196 patients, of whom 175 (88 assigned to talc pleurodesis, 87 assigned to VAT-PP) had confirmed mesothelioma. Overall survival at 1 year was 52% (95% CI 41-62) in the VAT-PP group and 57% (46-66) in the talc pleurodesis group (hazard ratio 1·04 [95% CI 0·76-1·42]; p=0·81). Surgical complications were significantly more common after VAT-PP than after talc pleurodesis, occurring in 24 (31%) of 78 patients who completed VAT-PP versus ten (14%) of 73 patients who completed talc pleurodesis (p=0·019), as were respiratory complications (19 [24%] vs 11 [15%]; p=0·22) and air-leak beyond 10 days (five [6%] vs one [1%]; p=0·21), although not significantly so. Median hospital stay was longer at 7 days (IQR 5-11) in patients who received VAT-PP compared with 3 days (2-5) for those who received talc pleurodesis (p<0·0001)., Interpretation: VAT-PP is not recommended to improve overall survival in patients with pleural effusion due to malignant pleural mesothelioma, and talc pleurodesis might be preferable considering the fewer complications and shorter hospital stay associated with this treatment., Funding: BUPA Foundation., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A common characteristic of environmental epidemiology is the multi-dimensional aspect of exposure patterns, frequently reduced to a cumulative exposure for simplicity of analysis. By adopting a flexible Bayesian clustering approach, we explore the risk function linking exposure history to disease. This approach is applied here to study the relationship between different smoking characteristics and lung cancer in the framework of a population based case control study., Methods: Our study includes 4658 males (1995 cases, 2663 controls) with full smoking history (intensity, duration, time since cessation, pack-years) from the ICARE multi-centre study conducted from 2001-2007. We extend Bayesian clustering techniques to explore predictive risk surfaces for covariate profiles of interest., Results: We were able to partition the population into 12 clusters with different smoking profiles and lung cancer risk. Our results confirm that when compared to intensity, duration is the predominant driver of risk. On the other hand, using pack-years of cigarette smoking as a single summary leads to a considerable loss of information., Conclusions: Our method estimates a disease risk associated to a specific exposure profile by robustly accounting for the different dimensions of exposure and will be helpful in general to give further insight into the effect of exposures that are accumulated through different time patterns.