OBJECTIVE: The value of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) for asymptomatic unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients remains contentious. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the prognostic significance of upfront PTR for asymptomatic unresectable mCRC.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on June 21st, 2024. To minimize the bias and ensure robust evidence, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-matched studies (CMS) that compared PTR followed by chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), while cancer-specific survival (CSS) served as the secondary outcome.
RESULTS: Eight studies (three RCTs and five CMS) involving 1221 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, upfront PTR followed by chemotherapy did not improve OS (hazard ratios [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.04, P = 0.17), but was associated with slightly better CSS (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.88, P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: The current limited evidence indicates that upfront PTR does not improve OS but may enhance CSS in asymptomatic unresectable mCRC patients. Ongoing trials are expected to provide more reliable evidence on this issue.

OBJECTIVE: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with pleural dissemination are generally contraindicated for surgery. This study aimed to investigate the survival benefits of primary tumor resection for NSCLC patients with unexpectedly detected pleural disseminated nodules during thoracotomy in the era of targeted therapy.
METHODS: Of the 4984 patients with NSCLC who underwent surgery without induction therapy between 2000 and 2021, we retrospectively evaluated 90 (1.8%) patients with unexpectedly detected pleural disseminated nodule. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression.
RESULTS: Among the evaluated patients, 58 were male, the median age was 67, and 77 (86%) were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma. Exploratory thoracotomy was performed in 21 (23%), and primary tumor resection was performed in 69 (77%) patients, including pneumonectomy in four, lobectomy in 39, and sublobar resection in 26. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutation and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement were detected in 33 (37%) and 4 (4%) cases, respectively. Among them, 31 patients received targeted therapy. The overall survival (OS) was not significantly different between patients with primary tumor resection and exploratory thoracotomy (5-year OS rate: 30.2% vs. 27.8%, p = 0.81). Multivariable analysis revealed that sex (p = 0.02) and targeted therapy (p < 0.01) were independent prognostic factors for OS. Survival outcomes in patients who received targeted therapy were significantly better regardless of primary tumor resection.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary tumor resection might not affect the survival in NSCLC patients with unexpectedly detected pleural disseminated nodules in the era of targeted therapy.

暂无摘要。

Patients who undergo primary tumor resection (PTR) reportedly have significantly higher overall survival (OS) than those who do not undergo this procedure. However, this result is only evident in past retrospective studies, and clinical trial results did not show the same trend. Thus, it remains unclear whether primary tumor resection effectively increases survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) across different study designs. We compared the OS of patients with asymptomatic unresectable mCRC who underwent PTR with that of those who did not. This retrospective cohort study was designed to be a target trial emulation of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that would have compared the effectiveness of PTR versus non-PTR in patients with asymptomatic unresectable mCRC from 2009 to 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy of PTR and non-PTR in patients with mCRC, and corresponding results were compared. This cohort included 1,132 patients for a per-protocol analysis. The PTR group had non-significantly longer survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.70, 95% confidence interval: 0.62-1.01) than the non-PTR group in our cohort. A meta-analysis including five RCTs (1,016 patients) and our cohort found that the PTR group did not have a significantly lower mortality rate than the non-PTR group. The results of this cohort study and previous RCTs suggest that PTR is not associated with improved survival compared to systemic chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy among asymptomatic unresectable mCRC patients. Therefore, routine PTR is not recommended in these patients.

BACKGROUND: Upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) has been associated with longer overall survival (OS) in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in retrospective analyses. The aim of the CAIRO4 study was to investigate whether the addition of upfront PTR to systemic therapy resulted in a survival benefit in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of their primary tumor.
METHODS: This randomized phase III trial was conducted in 45 hospitals in The Netherlands and Denmark. Eligibility criteria included previously untreated mCRC, unresectable metastases, and no severe symptoms of the primary tumor. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to upfront PTR followed by systemic therapy or systemic therapy without upfront PTR. Systemic therapy consisted of first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab in both arms. Primary endpoint was OS in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01606098.
RESULTS: Between August 2012 and February 2021, 206 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 204 patients were included (n = 103 without upfront PTR, n = 101 with upfront PTR) of whom 116 were men (57%) with median age of 65 years (interquartile range 59-71 years). Median follow-up was 69.4 months. Median OS in the arm without upfront PTR was 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 16.0-22.2 months) compared with 20.1 months (95% confidence interval 17.0-25.1 months) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.32). The number of grade 3-4 events was 71 (72%) in the arm without upfront PTR and 61 (65%) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.33). Three deaths (3%) possibly related to treatment were reported in the arm without upfront PTR and four (4%) in the upfront PTR arm.
CONCLUSIONS: Addition of upfront PTR to palliative systemic therapy in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of the primary tumor does not result in a survival benefit. This practice should no longer be considered standard of care.

BACKGROUND: Neuroendocrine tumors of the small bowel (small intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms, SI-NEN) are the most frequent tumors of the small intestine and approximately 30-40% are still surgically treatable with curative intent at the time of diagnosis. Certain surgical principles must be followed for optimal oncological outcomes and good postoperative quality of life.
METHODS: Based on international guidelines and own experiences, the locoregional surgical treatment of SI-NENs is presented.
RESULTS: Locoregional SI-NENs should always be resected if technically feasible, as only this approach can achieve a long-term cure and even small primary tumors (< 10 mm) often already show lymphatic metastasis. The resectability of SI-NENs and their difficulty depend on the extent of lymphatic metastasis, which should be assessed based on preoperative imaging of the extent around the superior mesenteric artery. Currently, the surgical gold standard for SI-NENs is open surgery with bidigital palpation of the entire small intestine followed by primary tumor resection via small bowel segment resection, right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection and vessel-sparing, and therefore organ-preserving lymphadenectomy (≥ 8 lymph nodes). The guidelines consider that laparoscopic or robotic approaches are justified only for early stages of SI-NENs.
CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-compliant surgical treatment of locoregional SI-NEN enables recurrence-free long-term survival with good quality of life.
UNASSIGNED: HINTERGRUND: Neuroendokrine Tumoren des Dünndarms (SI-NEN) sind die häufigsten Dünndarmtumoren, und etwa 30–40 % sind bei Diagnosestellung noch mit kurativ Intention chirurgisch therapierbar. Für ein optimales onkologisches Ergebnis und eine gute postoperative Lebensqualität sind bestimmte chirurgische Prinzipien einzuhalten.
METHODS: Anhand internationaler Leitlinien und eigenen Erfahrungen wird die lokoregionäre chirurgische Therapie der SI-NEN dargestellt.
UNASSIGNED: Lokoregionäre SI-NEN sollten stets – wenn technisch möglich – reseziert werden, da nur so eine dauerhafte Kuration zu erreichen ist und selbst kleine Primärtumoren (< 10 mm) häufig bereits lymphatisch metastasiert sind. Die Resektabilität der SI-NEN und deren Schwierigkeit hängen vom Ausmaß der lymphatischen Metastasierung ab, die anhand der präoperativen Bildgebung nach ihrer Ausdehnung im Bereich der A. mesenterica superior beurteilt werden sollte. Derzeit wird die offene Operation mit bidigitaler Palpation des gesamten Dünndarms, gefolgt von der Primariusresektion mittels Dünndarmsegmentresektion oder Hemikolektomie rechts bzw. Ileozökalresektion und gefäß- und damit organsparender Lymphadenektomie (≥ 8 Lymphknoten), als chirurgischer Goldstandard bei SI-NEN erachtet. Die Leitlinien halten ein laparoskopisches oder robotisches Vorgehen nur in Frühstadien der SI-NEN für gerechtfertigt.
UNASSIGNED: Eine leitliniengerechte chirurgische Therapie lokoregionärer SI-NEN ermöglicht ein rezidivarmes Langzeitüberleben mit guter Lebensqualität.

Patients with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine tumors (NET) often present with advanced disease. Primary tumor resection (PTR) in the setting of unresectable metastatic disease is controversial. Most studies evaluating the impact of PTR on overall survival (OS) have been performed using large population-based databases, with limited treatment related data. This study aims to determine whether PTR improves OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic well-differentiated GEP-NET. This is a retrospective single-institution study of patients with metastatic well-differentiated GEP-NET between 1978 and 2021. The primary outcome was OS. The secondary outcome was PFS. Chi-squared tests and Cox regression were used to perform univariate and multivariate analyses (MVA). OS and PFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Between 1978 and 2021, 505 patients presented with metastatic NET, 151 of whom had well-differentiated GEP-NET. PTR was performed in 31 PNET and 77 SBNET patients. PTR was associated with improved median OS for PNET (136 vs. 61 months, p = .003) and SBNET (not reached vs. 79 months, p<.001). On MVA, only higher grade (HR 3.70, 95%CI 1.49-9.17) and PTR (HR 0.21, 95%CI 0.08-0.53) influenced OS. PTR resulted in longer median PFS for patients with SBNET (46 vs. 28 months, p = .03) and a trend toward longer median PFS for patients with PNET (20 vs. 13 months, p = .07). In patients with metastatic well-differentiated GEP-NET, PTR is associated with improved OS and may be associated with improved PFS and should be considered in a multidisciplinary setting. Future prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

UNASSIGNED: There is a controversy about whether surgery should proceed among metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) patients. A survival benefit was observed in mPC patients who underwent primary tumor resection; however, determining which patients would benefit from surgery is complex. For this purpose, we created a model to identify mPC patients who may benefit from primary tumor excision.
UNASSIGNED: Patients with mPC were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, and separated into surgery and nonsurgery groups based on whether the primary tumor was resected. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance confounding factors between the two groups. A nomogram was developed using multivariable logistic regression to estimate surgical benefit. Our model is evaluated using multiple methods.
UNASSIGNED: About 662 of 14,183 mPC patients had primary tumor surgery. Kaplan-Meier analyses showed that the surgery group had a better prognosis. After PSM, a survival benefit was still observed in the surgery group. Among the surgery cohort, 202 patients survived longer than 4 months (surgery-beneficial group). The nomogram discriminated better in training and validation sets under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), and calibration curves were consistent. Decision curve analysis (DCA) revealed that it was clinically valuable. This model is better at identifying candidates for primary tumor excision.
UNASSIGNED: A helpful prediction model was developed and validated to identify ideal candidates who may benefit from primary tumor resection in mPC.

OBJECTIVE: The complex medical care of synchronous metastatic colorectal (smCRC) patients requires prudent multidisciplinary planning and treatments due to various challenges caused by the primary tumor and its metastases. The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) is currently uncertain; strong arguments exist for and against it. We aimed to define its effect and find its best place in our therapeutic methodology.
METHODS: We performed retrospective data analysis to investigate the clinical course of 449 smCRC patients, considering treatment modalities and the location of the primary tumor and comparing the clinical results of the patients with or without PTR between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 at the Institute of Oncotherapy of the University of Pécs.
RESULTS: A total of 63.5% of the 449 smCRC patients had PTR. Comparing their data to those whose primary tumor remained intact (IPT), we observed significant differences in median progression-free survival with first-line chemotherapy (mPFS1) (301 vs. 259 days; p < 0.0001; 1 y PFS 39.2% vs. 26.6%; OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.36-0.87)) and median overall survival (mOS) (760 vs. 495 days; p < 0.0001; 2 y OS 52.4 vs. 26.9%; OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.33-0.53)), respectively. However, in the PTR group, the average ECOG performance status was significantly better (0.98 vs. 1.1; p = 0.0456), and the use of molecularly targeted agents (MTA) (45.3 vs. 28.7%; p = 0.0005) and rate of metastasis ablation (MA) (21.8 vs. 1.2%; p < 0.0001) were also higher, which might explain the difference partially. Excluding the patients receiving MTA and MA from the comparison, the effect of PTR remained evident, as the mOS differences in the reduced PTR subgroup compared to the reduced IPT subgroup were still strongly significant (675 vs. 459 days; p = 0.0009; 2 y OS 45.9 vs. 24.1%; OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.79). Further subgroup analysis revealed that the site of the primary tumor also had a major impact on the outcome considering only the IPT patients; shorter mOS was observed in the extrapelvic IPT subgroup in contrast with the intrapelvic IPT group (422 vs. 584 days; p = 0.0026; 2 y OS 18.2 vs. 35.9%; OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.18-0.89)). Finally, as a remarkable finding, it should be emphasized that there were no differences in OS between the smCRC PTR subgroup and metachronous mCRC patients (mOS 760 vs. 710 days, p = 0.7504, 2 y OS OR 0.85 (95% CI 0.58-1.26)).
CONCLUSIONS: The role of PTR in smCRC is still not professionally justified. Our survey found that most patients had benefited from PTR. Nevertheless, further prospective trials are needed to clarify the optimal treatment sequence of smCRC patients and understand this cancer disease\'s inherent biology.

BACKGROUND: There exists continuous controversy regarding the benefit of primary tumor resection (PTR) for stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Little is known about how to predict the patients\' benefit from PTR. This study aimed to develop a tool for surgical benefit prediction.
METHODS: Stage IV CRC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database were included. Patients receiving PTR who survived longer than the median cancer-specific survival (CSS) time of those who did not undergo PTR were considered to benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified prognostic factors influencing surgical benefit, based on which a nomogram was constructed. The data of patients who underwent PTR from our institution was used for external validation. A user-friendly webserver was then built for convenient clinical use.
RESULTS: The median CSS of the PTR group was 23 months, significantly longer than that of the non-PTR group (7 months, P < 0.001). In the PTR group, 23.3% of patients did not benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified age, marital status, tumor location, CEA level, chemotherapy, metastasectomy, tumor size, tumor deposits, number of examined lymph nodes, N stage, histological grade and number of distant metastases as independently associated with surgical benefit. The established prognostic nomogram demonstrated satisfactory performance in both the internal and external validation.
CONCLUSIONS: PTR was associated with prolonged CSS in stage IV CRC. The proposed nomogram could be used as an evidenced-based platform for risk-to-benefit assessment to select appropriate patients for undergoing PTR.