Christmas dinner 2019 flyer

Reducing timelines in a time of increased demands

• To work collaboratively with all those involved in the pathway
• Try and trim off time at each step of the pathway without compromising patient care

mpMRI and biopsy

• Target the lesion, sample the other side
• Once you are happy with your MRI/targeted biopsy pathway, allow men with a negative MRI and low PSA density to choose not to have standard biopsy
• mpMRI is an effective, validated diagnostic tool in the detection of prostate cancer but, as a limited resource, should be used wisely and appropriately.
• Urologists should refrain from undertaking routine transrectal biopsy in patients with a marginally raised PSA without considering all factors in the decision making process e.g. FHX, DRE findings, BRCA status, MRI findings and PSA density.
• Transrectal biopsy is not without its morbidity and should not be used as a screening biopsy tool.

 Pathology in the pathway

• Clinicians do not need knowledge of histology but must be able to interpret pathology report data correctly
• Prostate biopsy report interpretation has several unique features. “Headline” figures may be misleading
• Grade and stage are biological continuums with subjective cut-offs. In borderline cases, effective communication is more important than the accuracy of assigned grade/stage.

Patient’s perspective from the CNS

• Consider what patients expect and require from the referral process and what constitutes a good patient experience
• Understand the MRI, understand the patient, plan a strategy

 

Editorial: Gleason score assignment is the sole responsibility of the pathologist Murali Varma, Dan Berney, Jon Oxley, Kiril Trpkov
Histopathology 2018;73:5-7.  https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/his.13472
J Clin Pathol 2018;71:874-878  https://jcp.bmj.com/content/71/10/874.abstract

Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study Hashim UAhmedFRCS^ab* AhmedEl-Shater BosailyMBBCh^ab* Louise CBrownPhD^d* RhianGabePhD^e ProfRichardKaplanFRCP^d ProfMahesh KParmarDPhil^d  YolandaCollaco-MoraesPhD^d KatieWardBSc^d Richard GHindleyFRCS^f AlexFreemanFRCPath^g Alex PKirkhamFRCR^h RobertOldroydMAⁱ  ChrisParkerFRCR^c  ProfMarkEmbertonFRCS^abPROMIS study group^†

MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis Veeru Kasivisvanathan, M.R.C.S., Antti S. Rannikko, Ph.D., Marcelo Borghi, M.D., Valeria Panebianco, M.D., Lance A. Mynderse, M.D., Markku H. Vaarala, Ph.D., Alberto Briganti, Ph.D., Lars Budäus, M.D., Giles Hellawell, F.R.C.S.(Urol.), Richard G. Hindley, et al., for the PRECISION Study Group Collaborators^*

A Prospective, Blinded Comparison of Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging–Ultrasound Fusion and Visual Estimation in the Performance of MR-targeted Prostate Biopsy: The PROFUS Trial James S.Wysock^a Andrew B.Rosenkrantz^b William C.Huang^a Michael D.Stifelman^a HerbertLepor^a Fang-MingDeng^c  JonathanMelamed^c  Samir S.Taneja^a
Eur Urol. 2018 Jul;74(1):48-54. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.03.007. Epub 2018 Mar 19.

Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer: What’s Next? Panebianco V¹, Barchetti G², Simone G³, Del Monte M⁴, Ciardi A⁴, Grompone MD⁴, Campa R⁴, Indino EL⁴, Barchetti F⁴, Sciarra A⁵, Leonardo C⁵, Gallucci M³, Catalano C⁶.

Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI‐transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion‐guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool Gabriele Gaziev, Karan Wadhwa, Tristan Barrett, Brendan C. Koo, Ferdia A. Gallagher, Eva Serrao, Julia Frey, Jonas Seidenader, Lina Carmona, Anne Warren.

Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI‐RADS) score and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patients Satoshi Washino, Tomohisa Okochi, Kimitoshi Saito, Tsuzumi Konishi, Masaru Hirai, Yutaka Kobayashi, Tomoaki Miyagawa

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate H. Steyn, W. Smith  First published: December 1982  British Journal of Urology – Volume 54, Issue 6

NMR scanning of the pelvis: initial experience with a 0.3 T system PJ Bryan, HE Butler, JP LiPuma, Haaga, JR … Show all

MR imaging of the prostate gland: normal anatomy H Hricak, GC Dooms, JE McNeal, AS Mark.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection, Localisation, and Characterisation of Prostate Cancer: Recommendations from a European Consensus Meeting LouiseDickinson^abc Hashim U.Ahmed^ab ClareAllen^d  Jelle O.Barentsz^e BrendanCarey^f Jurgen J.Futterer^e  Stijn W.Heijmink^e Peter J.Hoskin^g AlexKirkham^d Anwar R.Padhani^h RajPersadⁱ  PhilippePuech^j  ShonitPunwani^d Aslam S.Sohaib^k BertrandTombal^l ArnauldVillers^m Janvan der Meulen^cn  MarkEmberton^abc

DWI of Prostate Cancer: Optimal -Value in Clinical Practice Guglielmo Manenti,¹ Marco Nezzo,¹ Fabrizio Chegai,¹ Erald Vasili,¹Elena Bonanno,² and Giovanni Simonetti¹

The impact of computed high b-value images on the diagnostic accuracy of DWI for prostate cancer: A receiver operating characteristics analysis Peigang Ning, Dapeng Shi, Geoffrey A. Sonn, Shreyas S. Vasanawala, Andreas M. Loening, Pejman Ghanouni, Piotr Obara, Lewis K. Shin, Richard E. Fan, Brian A. Hargreaves & Bruce L. Daniel  Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Volume 36, Issue 1

Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient values obtained using high b‐value when diagnosing prostate cancer using 3 tesla MRI: Comparison between ultra‐high b‐value (2000 s/mm²) and standard high b‐value (1000 s/mm²) Kazuhiro Kitajima MD, PhD, Satoru Takahashi MD, PhD, Yoshiko Ueno MD, Takeshi Yoshikawa MD, PhD, Yoshiharu Ohno MD, PhD, Makoto Obara PhD… See all authors 

National implementation of multi‐parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection – recommendations from a UK consensus meeting Mrishta Brizmohun Appayya, ¹ Jim Adshead, ² Hashim U. Ahmed, ^{3 , 4}Clare Allen, ⁵ Alan Bainbridge, ⁶ Tristan Barrett, ⁷ Francesco Giganti, ^{3 , 5}John Graham, ⁸ Phil Haslam, ⁹ Edward W. Johnston, ^{1 , 5}Christof Kastner, ¹⁰ Alexander P.S. Kirkham, ⁵ Alexandra Lipton, ¹¹Alan McNeill, ¹² Larissa Moniz, ¹³ Caroline M. Moore, ^{4 , 14} Ghulam Nabi, ¹⁵ Anwar R. Padhani, ¹⁶ Chris Parker, ¹⁷ Amit Patel, ¹⁸Jacqueline Pursey, ¹⁹ Jonathan Richenberg, ²⁰  John Staffurth,  ²¹Jan van der Meulen, ²² Darren Walls, ²³ and Shonit Punwani ^{1 , 5}

Eur Radiol. 2012 Apr;22(4):746-57. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2377-y. Epub 2012 Feb 10.

ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Barentsz JO¹, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, Rouviere O, Logager V, Fütterer JJ; European Society of Urogenital Radiology.

PI-RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2Jeffrey C.Weinreb^a† Jelle O.Barentsz^b† Peter L.Choyke^c FrancoisCornud^d Masoom A.Haider^e Katarzyna J.Macura^f DanielMargolis^g Mitchell D.Schnall^h FainaShternⁱ Clare M.Tempany^j Harriet C.Thoeny^k SadnaVerma^l

Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use Jelle O. Barentsz. Correspondence information about the author Jelle O. Barentsz, Jeffrey C. Weinreb, Sadhna Verma, Harriet C. Thoeny, Clare M. Tempany, Faina Shtern, Anwar R. Padhani, Daniel Margolis, Katarzyna J. Macura, Masoom A. Haider, Francois Cornud, Peter L. Choyke  Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Volume 48, Issue 2

All over the map: An interobserver agreement study of tumor location based on the PI-RADSv2 sector map Matthew D. Greer MD, Joanna H. Shih PhD, Tristan Barrett MD, Sandra Bednarova MD, Ismail Kabakus MD, Yan Mee Law MD, Haytham Shebel MD, Maria J. Merino MD… See all authors   First published: 17 January 2018

Prostate MRI: Who, when, and how? Report from a UK consensus meeting A.P.S.Kirkham^a P.Haslam^b J.Y.Keanie^c I.McCafferty^d A.R.Padhani^e S.Punwani^a J.Richenberg^f G.Rottenberg^g A.Sohaib^h P.Thompson^f L.W.Turnbullⁱ L.Kurban^j A.Sahdev^k   R.Clements^l B.M.Carey^m C.Allen^a

Reporting Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Men on Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: The PRECISE Recommendations—A Report of a European School of Oncology Task Force Caroline M.Moore^ab‡ FrancescoGiganti^cd‡ PeterAlbertsen^e ClareAllen^c ChrisBangma^f AlbertoBriganti^g PeterCarroll^h MasoomHaider ⁱVeeruKasivisvanathan^ab AlexKirkham^c LaurenceKlotz^j AdilOuzzane^k   Anwar R.Padhani^l ValeriaPanebianco^m PeterPintoⁿ PhilippePuech^o AnttiRannikko^p RaphaeleRenard-Penna^q IvoSchoots^x

Sequential prostate MRI reporting in men on active surveillance: initial experience of a dedicated PRECISE software program FrancescoGiganti^ab ClareAllen^a Jonathan W.Piper^c DavidMirando^c ArmandoStabile^{bd e}ShonitPunwani^af AlexKirkham^a MarkEmberton^be Caroline M.Moore^be

A Prospective, Blinded Comparison of Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging–Ultrasound Fusion and Visual Estimation in the Performance of MR-targeted Prostate Biopsy: The PROFUS Trial

European Urology Volume 66, Issue 2, August 2014, Pages 343-351 James S.Wysock^a Andrew B.Rosenkrantz^b William C.Huang^a Michael D.Stifelman^a HerbertLepor^a Fang-MingDeng^c JonathanMelamed^c Samir S.Taneja^a  BJU International    Volume 117, Issue 1

Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI‐transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion‐guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool Gabriele Gaziev, Karan Wadhwa, Tristan Barrett, Brendan C. Koo, Ferdia A. Gallagher, Eva Serrao, Julia Frey, Jonas Seidenader, Lina Carmona, Anne Warren… See all authors  First published: 07 August 2014 BJU International     Volume 119, Issue 2

Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI‐RADS) score and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patientsSatoshi Washino, Tomohisa Okochi, Kimitoshi Saito, Tsuzumi Konishi, Masaru Hirai, Yutaka Kobayashi, Tomoaki Miyagawa   First published: 02 March 2016

VANGUARDS:  ‘Each vanguard will take a lead on the development of new care models which will act as the blueprints for the NHS moving forward and the inspiration to the rest of the health and care system’(www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/futurenhs/new-care-models)

 

 

TIPTOP – Greater Manchester 12th February 2019 Final programme for TIPTOP 12.2.19

Bob Williams – The Prostate Saga – My journey through prostate cancer

L to R: Bob Williams, Sarah Crane (CEO of Pelican Cancer Foundation),

 

My recent 60th birthday was not as enjoyable as I would have liked, about a week before it I was diagnosed with prostate cancer. Fortunately, it is described as treatable, but doing nothing is not an option. This all started back in August 2014 when I needed to see my GP because of a pulled hamstring and mentioned that I was going to the loo more frequently. My GP suggested that I have a blood test to check my PSA, she also explained about the other ‘treats’ that form part of the diagnosis.  Well, the PSA came back as 3.6 which she thought was a little high, so we progressed to the next stage. DRE is a digital examination, but there’s nothing technical about it.  So far I’ve been prodded and poked, sliced and diced, I’ve had a DRE, an MRI, a TRUS biopsy and a bone scan.

Why am I writing this? Hopefully so that anyone who reads this and is male, around 50 years old or more and has not had themselves checked goes and gets themselves checked.  If through reading this one person gets themselves checked, then my work is done. The message still remains the same, if you know a man over 45 who has not had a PSA test, drag the shy, selfish so-and-so down to the doctor’s and get it done!

Read Bob Williams’ story here.

Donate to Pelican Cancer Foundation to enable prostate cancer patients to live better, for longer.

Nearly 50,000 men in the UK are diagnosed with prostate cancer every year. For men, it is the second greatest cause of cancer death (over 11,000 every year).

The good news is that more than 80% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer will survive their disease for more than 10 years. This improvement in survival has tripled since 1980.

What we do:

• Pelican Cancer Foundation supported early research into improved imaging (MRI) for diagnosis and the most precise treatment (focal therapy). The charity continues to support research studies in this area.
• Locally in Basingstoke, we support the weekly prostate cancer multi-disciplinary team meeting by providing purpose-built space and facilities.
• We aim to embed change throughout the NHS by running workshops for doctors and nurses to encourage wider use of new processes to give quicker and more accurate diagnosis.
• Support our prostate cancer research so that all men can benefit from changes to the treatment pathway.

Prostate cancer asks men (and their families) to make very difficult decisions about their treatment journey. We want to make sure that all men get the best diagnosis and most precise treatment –  resulting in a better quality of life.

Please see below for IMPACT course programmes for 2018.

Basingstoke: 26th January 2018 IMPACT programmeBasingstoke

Yorkshire: 21st March 2018 IMPACTprogramme York

Scotland: 2nd May 2018 IMPACTprogramme Edinburgh

Newcastle: 17th September 2018 Pelican IMPACT draft programme 17.9.18 Newcastle NV

Greater Manchester: 23rd November 2018 V.2 Draft programme for IMPACT Manchester.pdf

Ireland: 10th December 2018 V.1 CO Draft programme for IMPACT Ireland.pdf

East Midlands (Derby): 25th January V.2 SR Draft programme for IMPACT E Midlands.pdf

 

 

IMPACT: 25th January 2019/Derby

Colorectal Liver Metastases

1. All patients with colorectal liver metastases should be discussed in a specialist hepatobiliary MDT
2. All patients should have the results of their assessment and follow up scans as swiftly as possible, ideally the same day, acknowledging the significant anxiety experienced by patients at the time of a scan
3. Pre-operative chemotherapy should be given for the minimum number of cycles required to achieve resectability, to avoid chemotherapy-associated liver injury
4. Any liver resection should be parenchymal-sparing, to preserve liver volume and allow further interventions for recurrent disease
5. All resected patients should be entered into a CT surveillance programme. Patients whose liver metastases have disappeared with chemotherapy will require more intensive surveillance, for a longer period of time
6. Molecular testing should be carried out prior to anti-EGFR treatment using an extended RAS panel (KRAS 12/13/59/61/117/146 and NRAS 12/13/59/61) and thought should be given as to which sample is most appropriate to test e.g. biopsy, resection, metastasis. Multiple blocks should be tested together from larger specimens to maximise the chances of finding a mutation.
7. Mismatch repair status should be available in all cases either by immunohistochemistry or MSI, in line with NICE guidance DG27.

Colorectal Lung Metastases

1. Criteria for consideration of pulmonary metastasectomy of colorectal disease: control of primary, radically treatable oligometastastic disease, resectable disease, sufficient pulmonary reserve, disease stability
2. Favourable prognostic features in patients undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy: longer disease free interval (< 1 year vs. >3 years), number of metastasis, complete resection, lack of nodal involvement
3. Factors of uncertain prognostic importance: CEA level, tumour doubling time, histopathological markers, re-operation
4. Investigate the possibility of a primary lung cancer rather than metastasis. Tissue morphological diagnosis is required to interpret molecular biomarkers.

Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases

1. Best outcomes: Limited disease PCI <20, favourable biology (differentiation, time to recurrence), response to adjuvant or neo adjuvant chemotherapy, complete cytoreduction
2. Effective and regular communication is helpful with patients; between units; and between teams
3. A clear understanding by patient and local teams that the pathway is often lengthy (approx. 3 months) requiring repeated investigations and assessments during which time interaction with key workers is essential

Locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer

1. Management of locally recurrent CRC is an MTE – Massive Team Endeavour: Referring team and MDT; receiving team and MDT; CNSs; Medical and clinical oncology; Palliative care; Radiology; IR; Pathology; Anaesthetics; different surgical specialties; medical physics and radiographers
2. No clear single model or pathway: Tailored to individual patients; anatomy, classification of disease, and circumstances
3. General oversight by specialist MDT where possible
4. Early review and discussion between the planned ultimate surgical team and patients and their family is encouraged

Palliative Care

1. Significant numbers of patients will have a reduced life expectancy and problematic symptoms. A study in 2016 showed that the most frequent symptoms reported are Worrying 65%; Lack of energy 59%; Drowsiness 54%; Bloated 53%; Pain 51; Insomnia 50%; the most severe are problems with sexual interest & loss of appetite.
2. A study in 2017 showed that patients perceive they have unmet needs. These are predominantly psychological: fear of spread; worry about family; lack of control; anxiety; uncertainty; death & dying; depression; keeping positive. Over 50% had at least one psychological need.
3. MDTs will see benefit if palliative care colleagues are fully integrated members of their MDT and service. Consider referring patients to palliative care early if they have metastatic or locally advanced disease. This can occur alongside other treatment processes and patients respond well to seeing a Palliative Medicine consultant in a hospital clinic.

IMPACT: 21st March/Yorkshire

Palliative Care

1. Significant numbers of patients will have a reduced life expectancy and problematic symptoms: Most severe symptoms = problems with sexual interest & loss of appetite
2. Patients perceive that they have unmet needs: fear of spread; worry about family; lack of control; anxiety; uncertainty; death & dying; depression; keeping positive. Over 50% had at least one psychological need. Association between perceived need psychological distress & QoL
3. When to refer for palliative care / enhanced supportive care: Early palliative care group had higher QoL at 14 weeks, less depression, more had documented DNAR order, less late (within 14 days of death) chemotherapy. Significantly longer median survival (2.7 months)

Colorectal Liver Metastases

1. All patients with colorectal liver metastases should be discussed in a specialist hepatobiliary MDT
2. All patients should have the results of their assessment and follow up scans as swiftly as possible, ideally the same day, acknowledging the significant anxiety experienced by patients at the time of a scan
3. Pre-operative chemotherapy should be given for the minimum number of cycles required to achieve resectability, to avoid chemotherapy-associated liver injury
4. Any liver resection should be parenchymal-sparing, to preserve liver volume and allow further interventions for recurrent disease
5. All resected patients should be entered into a CT surveillance programme. Patients whose liver metastases have disappeared with chemotherapy will require more intensive surveillance, for a longer period of time

Colorectal Lung Metastases

1. Criteria for consideration of pulmonary metastasectomy of colorectal disease: control of primary, radically treatable oligometastastic disease, resectable disease, sufficient pulmonary reserve, disease stability
2. Favourable prognostic features in patients undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy: longer disease free interval (< 1 year vs. >3 years), number of metastasis, complete resection, lack of nodal involvement
3. Factors of uncertain prognostic importance: CEA level, tumour doubling time, histopathological markers, re-operation

Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases

1. Best outcomes: Limited disease PCI <20, favourable biology (differentiation, time to recurrence), response to adjuvant or neo adjuvant chemotherapy, complete cytoreduction

Locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer

1. Management of locally recurrent CRC is an MTE – Massive Team Endeavour: Referring team and MDT; receiving team and MDT; CNSs; Medical and clinical oncology; Palliative care; Radiology; IR; Pathology; Anaesthetics; different surgical specialties; medical physics and radiographers
2. Communication challenges: Effective and regular communication is helpful with patients; between units; and between teams
3. A clear understanding by patient and local teams that the pathway is often lengthy (approx. 3 months) requiring repeated investigations and assessments during which time interaction with key workers is essential
4. No clear single model or pathway: Tailored to individual patients; anatomy, classification of disease, and circumstances
5. General oversight by specialist MDT where possible
6. Early review and discussion between the planned ultimate surgical team and patients and their family is encouraged

IMPACT: 26th January/Basingstoke

Colorectal liver metastases

Colorectal lung metastases ColorectalLung Metastases IMPACT EB v2

Colorectal peritoneal metastases Peritoneal Metastases IMPACT January FM

Colorectal peritoneal metastases Peritoneal Metastases IMPACT2

Colorectal peritoneal metastases Colorectal peritoneal metastases IMPACT pathology NC3

Locally advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer Locally recurrent CRC AHM

Palliative Care in Colorectal Cancer Palliative Care in colorectal cancer – IMPACT 1LB

Pathology IMPACT Pathology

Colorectal Liver Metastases

Local Treatment of Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results of a Randomized Phase II Trial. Ruers T, Van Coevorden F, Punt CJ, Pierie JE, Borel-Rinkes I, Ledermann JA, Poston G, Bechstein W, Lentz MA, Mauer M, Folprecht G, Van Cutsem E, Ducreux M, Nordlinger B; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC); Gastro-Intestinal Tract Cancer Group; Arbeitsgruppe Lebermetastasen und tumoren in der Chirurgischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft Onkologie (ALM-CAO); National Cancer Research Institute Colorectal Clinical Study Group (NCRI CCSG).

RE: Local Treatment of Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results of a RandomizedPhase II Trial. Macbeth F, Farewell V, Treasure T.

Progress and future direction in the management of advanced colorectal cancer G. M. Brown, M. J. Solomon First published: 13 April 2018

NICE Colorectal Cancer Quality Standard 20 [QS20], published August 2012

NICE guidance – Colorectal cancer: diagnosis and management (CG131), Last updated December 2014

Randomised multicentre trial of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI vs conventional MRI or CT in the staging of colorectal liver metastases, Zech CJ et al. British Journal of Surgery 2014, 101:613-21

Chemotherapy before liver resection of colorectal metastases – friend or foe? Lehmann K, Rickenbacher A, Weber A, Pestalozzi BC, Clavien PA. Annals of Surgery 2012, 255(2): 237-47.

One-millimeter cancer-free margin is curative for colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score case-match approach. Hamady ZZ, Lodge JP, Welsh FK, Toogood GJ, White A, John TG,. Rees M. Annals of Surgery 2014; 259(3):543-8.

Patient-reported outcomes after hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastases. Rees JR, Blazeby JM, Fayers P, Friend EA, Welsh FK, John TG, Rees M. J Clinical Oncology 2012; 30(12):1364-70.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver metastases. Aitken KL, Hawkins MA, Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2015, 27(5):307-15

Impact of hepatobiliary service centralization on treatment and outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer and liver metastases  E. Vallance  J. vanderMeulen  A. Kuryba  I. D. Botterill  J. Hill  D. G. Jayne  K. Walker

First published: 2 March 2017 https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10501

Cited by: 2 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/bjs.10501

---

Colorectal Lung Metastases

Radiofrequency ablation is a valid treatment option for lung metastases: experience in 566patients with 1037 metastases. de Baère T, Aupérin A, Deschamps F, Chevallier P, Gaubert Y, Boige V, Fonck M, Escudier B, Palussiére J.

Survival after radiofrequency ablation in 122 patients with inoperable colorectal lung metastases. de Baère T, Aupérin A, Deschamps F, Chevallier P, Gaubert Y, Boige V, Fonck M, Escudier B, Palussiére J.

Systematic review and meta-analysis – Gonzalez et al., Annals of Surgical Oncology 2013;20:572-9
2925 patients 25 studies, 27%-68% OS 5 years.

Pasturino U, Buyse M, Friedel G, et al., Long-term results of lung metastasectomy: prognostic analyses based on 5206 cases. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1997 Jan;113(1):37-49.

Gonzalez M, Poncet A Combescure C et al., Risk Factors for survival after lung metastasectomy in colorectal cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Feb;20(2):572-9.

Surgery and ablative techniques for lung metastases in the Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC) trial: is there equivalence? Treasure T et a., J Thorac Dis. 2016.

Prognostic factors after pulmonary metastasectomy of colorectal cancers: a single centre experience. Fournel L et al. J Thorac Dis. 2017.

Pulmonary metastasectomy: an overview Petrella F et al., J Thorac Dis 2017.

 

---

Pathology

Molecular testing key papers:

https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/dg27

Molecular testing in advanced/metastatic disease

RAS testing of colorectal carcinoma—a guidance document from the Association of Clinical Pathologists Molecular Pathology and Diagnostics Group

Newton ACS Wong1, David Gonzalez2, Manuel Salto-Tellez3, Rachel Butler4, Salvador J Diaz-Cano5, Mohammad Ilyas6, William Newman7, Emily Shaw8, Philippe Taniere9, Shaun V Walsh10

Standards for integrated reporting in cellular pathology January 2017

Intra-tumoral heterogeneity of KRAS and BRAF mutation status in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) and cost-effectiveness of multiple sample testing. Richman SD1, Chambers P, Seymour MT, Daly C, Grant S, Hemmings G, Quirke P.

Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officers 2016

---

Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases

Randomized trial of cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy and palliative surgery in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. Verwaal VJ1, van Ruth S, de Bree E, van Sloothen GW, van Tinteren H, Boot H, Zoetmulder FA.

Peritoneal colorectal carcinomatosis treated with surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: retrospective analysis of 523 patients from a multicentric French study. Elias D1, Gilly F, Boutitie F, Quenet F, Bereder JM, Mansvelt B, Lorimier G, Dubè P, Glehen O.

Cytoreductive surgery in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy improves survival in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases compared with systemic chemotherapy alone R Mirnezami, A M Mehta, K Chandrakumaran, T Cecil, B J Moran, N Carr, V J Verwaal, F Mohamed & A H Mirnezami

Peritoneal metastases of lower GI tract origin… Ung L:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2013; 139:1899-1908

Peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer… Massalou D: American Journal of Surgery 2017; 213:377-87

External validation of models predicting the individual risk of metachronous peritoneal carcinomatosis from colon and rectal cancer. Segelman J: Colorectal Dis 2015; 18:378-85.

NICE guidance IPG 331 Cytoreduction surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis Feb 2010

NHS Commissioning A08/P/a  Cytoreduction surgery for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis April 3013

Impact of surgical volume of centers on post-operative outcomes from cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemoperfusion. Rahul Rajeev, Brittany Klooster, and Kiran K. Turag J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016 Feb; 7(1): 122–128

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cytoreductive Surgery with Perioperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Origin. Cao C, Yan TD, Black D, Morris DL. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Aug 12;16(8):2152–65

Prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer given systemic therapy: an analysis of individual patient data from prospective randomised trials from the Analysis and Research in Cancers of the Digestive System (ARCAD) database. Franko J, Shi Q, Meyers JP, Maughan TS, Adams RA, Seymour MT, et al.  Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(12):1709–19

---

Local Recurrence

Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P.  Ann Surg. 2011 May;253(5):890-9.

Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer. PelvEx Collaborators (83)

Anastomotic Leaks After Restorative Resections for Rectal Cancer Compromise Cancer Outcomes and Survival. Lu ZR, Rajendran N, Lynch AC, Heriot AG, Warrier SK. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016 Mar;59(3):236-44.

Beyond TME Collaborative. Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes. Br J Surg. 2013 Jul;100(8):1009-14.

Beyond TME Collaborative. Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes. Br J Surg. 2013 Jul;100(8):E1-33.

---

Other papers collected by Pelican

The Fundamental Difference Between Cancer Treatment and Patient Care

Advances in surgical management for locally recurrent rectal cancer: How far have we come? Daniel Jin-Keat Lee, Peter M Sagar, Gaitri Sadadcharam, and Kok-Yang Tan
World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jun 21; 23(23): 4170–4180.

Effect of specialist decision-making on treatment strategies for colorectal liver metastases Jones RP1, Vauthey JN, Adam R, Rees M, Berry D, Jackson R, Grimes N, Fenwick SW, Poston GJ, Malik HZ.  Br J Surg. 2012 Nov;99(11):1605

Large variation in the utilization of liver resections in stage IV colorectal cancer patients with metastases confined to the liver AlibR.H.A.VerhoevencR.M.H. Roumend V.E.P.P. LemmenscA.M.Rijkenb, J.H.W.De Wilta

European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO) Volume 41, Issue 9, September 2015, Pages 1217-1225

Regional and inter-hospital differences in the utilisation of liver surgery for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands Lam-BoeraE.P. van der StokbJ. HuiskenscR.H.A., VerhoevendC.J.A., PunteM.A.G.,  ElferinkdJ.H, de WiltaC.Verhoefb

the CAIRO5/CHARISMA Group1
European Journal of Cancer Volume 71, January 2017, Pages 109-116

Treatment of colorectal peritoneal metastases requires multidisciplinary efforts Diane Goéré, Maximiliano Gelli

Lancet Oncology  Volume 17, No. 12, p1630–1631, December 2016

---

Onco-Surgical Management of Liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer

Population-based study on resection rates and survival in patients with colorectal liver metastasis in Norway J.-H. Angelsen, A. Horn,  Sorbye,  G. E. Eide, I. M. Løes, A. Viste
BJS First published: 9 February 2017 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10457

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases: from novelty to routine in selected cases – B Moran.
Techniques in Coloproctology. September 2017, Volume 21, Issue 9, pp 767–769 | Cite as