No abstract

Purpose A pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0N0) of a rectal tumor after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) is associated with an excellent prognosis. Several retrospective studies have investigated the effect of increasing the delay after RCT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of increasing the interval between the end of RCT and surgery on the pCR rate. Methods GRECCAR6 was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or Tx N+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45 to 50 Gy with fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included. Patients were randomly included in the 7-week or the 11-week (11w) group. Primary end point was the pCR rate defined as a ypT0N0 specimen (NCT01648894). Results A total of 265 patients from 24 centers were enrolled between October 2012 and February 2015. The majority of the tumors were cT3 (82%). After RCT, surgery was not performed in nine patients (3.4%) because of the occurrence of distant metastasis (n = 5) or other reasons. Two patients underwent local resection of the tumor scar. A total of 47 (18.6%) specimens were classified as ypT0 (four had invaded lymph nodes [8.5%]). The primary end point (ypT0N0) was not different (7 weeks: 20 of 133, 15.0% v 11w: 23 of 132, 17.4%; P = .5983). Morbidity was significantly increased in the 11w group (44.5% v 32%; P = .0404) as a result of increased medical complications (32.8% v 19.2%; P = .0137). The 11w group had a worse quality of mesorectal resection (complete mesorectum [I] 78.7% v 90%; P = .0156). Conclusion Waiting 11 weeks after RCT did not increase the rate of pCR after surgical resection. A longer waiting period may be associated with higher morbidity and more difficult surgical resection.

BRAF p.V600 mutation detection recently became necessary to treat metastatic melanoma patients with vemurafenib. This study compares different methods of detection of BRAF mutations. Melanoma samples from 111 patients were analyzed for BRAF mutations, and for 89 of them, results were obtained with the four following methods: Sanger sequencing, real-time PCR, immunohistochemistry, and pyrosequencing. All samples contained at least 60% of tumor cells. Directional Sanger sequencing of PCR products failed to detect 3 of 40 p.V600E-mutated cases (7.5%) (sensitivity, 92.5%; 95% CI, 78.5% to 98.0%). BRAF p.V600E-specific real-time PCR identified 39 of 40 p.V600E-mutated cases (97.6%) (sensitivity, 97.5%; 95% CI, 87.1% to 99.6%) and all 39 wild-type (WT) cases and surprisingly was also positive for 6/6 p.V600K (specificity, 87.8%; 95% CI, 75.8% to 94.3%). However, other mutations, p.V600R (n = 1), p.K601E (n = 2), and p.600_601delinsE (n = 1), were not detected. Immunohistochemistry with VE1, specific for p.V600E, identified all p.V600E and WT cases (sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 91.2% to 100%) but was negative for all other BRAF mutations. Pyrosequencing successfully identified all WT and mutated cases. Immunohistochemistry is highly specific for p.V600E, and could be used as a first-line method, as is currently performed for HER2 amplification detection. Pyrosequencing proved to be the most efficient method to detect BRAF mutations in melanomas and could be performed on VE1-negative or uninterpretable cases.

In most cases, the pelvic nerves can be preserved during rectal surgery. Complete oncological resection may require dissection close to the nerves where the tumour is located anterolaterally where it is fixed and when the pelvis is narrow.

BackgroundOpen transthoracic oesophagectomy is the standard treatment for infracarinal resectable oesophageal carcinomas, although it is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates of 2 to 10% and 30 to 50%, respectively, for both the abdominal and thoracic approaches. The worldwide popularity of laparoscopic techniques is based on promising results, including lower postoperative morbidity rates, which are related to the reduced postoperative trauma. We hypothesise that the laparoscopic abdominal approach (laparoscopic gastric mobilisation) in oesophageal cancer surgery will decrease the major postoperative complication rate due to the reduced surgical trauma.Methods/DesignThe MIRO trial is an open, controlled, prospective, randomised multicentre phase III trial. Patients in study arm A will receive laparoscopic-assisted oesophagectomy, i.e., a transthoracic oesophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and laparoscopic gastric mobilisation. Patients in study arm B will receive the same procedure, but with the conventional open abdominal approach. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the major postoperative 30-day morbidity. Secondary objectives are to assess the overall 30-day morbidity, 30-day mortality, 30-day pulmonary morbidity, disease-free survival, overall survival as well as quality of life and to perform medico-economic analysis. A total of 200 patients will be enrolled, and two safety analyses will be performed using 25 and 50 patients included in arm A.DiscussionPostoperative morbidity remains high after oesophageal cancer surgery, especially due to major pulmonary complications, which are responsible for 50% of the postoperative deaths. This study represents the first randomised controlled phase III trial to evaluate the benefits of the minimally invasive approach with respect to the postoperative course and oncological outcomes in oesophageal cancer surgery.Trial RegistrationNCT00937456 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

BRAF (V600) status could be used to stage melanoma patients with nodal deposits. Our results may also help to plan adjuvant trials in these patients, for whom the low tumor load may induce longer efficacy of BRAF-targeted therapies.

Background: Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) has been shown to reduce major postoperative complications compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for esophageal cancer. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL) following HMIE and OE within a randomized controlled trial. Methods: We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial at 13 study centers between 2009 and 2012. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with resectable cancers of the middle or lower third of the esophagus were randomized to undergo either transthoracic OE or HMIE. Patients were followed-up every 6 months for 3 years postoperatively and global health assessed with EORTC-QLQC30 and esophageal symptoms assessed with EORTC-OES18. Results: The short-term reduction in global HRQOL at 30 days specifically role functioning [−33.33 (HMIE) vs −46.3 (OE); P = 0.0407] and social functioning [−16.88 (HMIE) vs −35.74 (OE); P = 0.0003] was less substantial in the HMIE group. At 2 years, social functioning had improved following HMIE to beyond baseline (+5.37) but remained reduced in the OE group (−8.33) (P = 0.0303). At 2 years, increases in pain were similarly reduced in the HMIE compared with the OE group [+6.94 (HMIE) vs +14.05 (OE); P = 0.018]. Postoperative complications in multivariate analysis were associated with role functioning, pain, and dysphagia. Conclusions: Esophagectomy has substantial effects upon short-term HRQOL. These effects for some specific parameters are, however, reduced with HMIE, with persistent differences up to 2 years, and maybe mediated by a reduction in postoperative complications.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate prospectively magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of the circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer to identify in which patient magnetic resonance imaging could accurately assess the circumferential resection margin before surgery and in which patients it could not. METHODS: During a 17-month period, a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of circumferential resection margin was obtained prospectively in 38 patients with mid or low rectal cancer. The agreement of magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic examination for assessment of circumferential resection margin was analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, magnetic resonance imaging agreed with histologic examination of the circumferential resection margin assessment in 28 patients (73 percent; = 0.47). In all cases of disagreement between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology, magnetic resonance imaging overestimated the circumferential resection margin involvement. For the 11 patients with mid rectal cancer, circumferential resection margin was well predicted by magnetic resonance imaging in all cases ( = 1). For 27 patients with low rectal tumor, overall agreement between magnetic resonance imaging and histologic assessment was 63 percent ( = 0.35). Agreement was 22 percent ( = 0.03) for the 9 patients with low anterior and 83 percent ( = 0.67) for the 18 patients with low posterior rectal tumor. Univariate analysis revealed that only low and anterior rectal tumor was risk factor of overestimation of the circumferential resection margin by magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Although magnetic resonance imaging remains the best imaging tool for the preoperative assessment of the circumferential resection margin in patients with rectal cancer, it can overestimate the circumferential resection margin involvement in low and anterior tumor with the risk of overtreating the patients. [