BackgroundShared decision-making has become of increased importance in choosing the most suitable treatment strategy for early rectal cancer, however, clinical decision-making is still primarily... Show moreBackgroundShared decision-making has become of increased importance in choosing the most suitable treatment strategy for early rectal cancer, however, clinical decision-making is still primarily based on physicians' perspectives. Balancing quality of life and oncological outcomes is difficult, and guidance on patients' involvement in this subject in early rectal cancer is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explore preferences and priorities of patients as well as physicians' perspectives in treatment for early rectal cancer.MethodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with early rectal cancer patients (n = 10) and healthcare providers (n = 10). Participants were asked which factors influenced their preferences and how important these factors were. Thematic analyses were performed. In addition, participants were asked to rank the discussed factors according to importance to gain additional insights.ResultsPatients addressed the following relevant factors: the risk of an ostomy, risk of poor bowel function and treatment related complications. Healthcare providers emphasized oncological outcomes as tumour recurrence, risk of an ostomy and poor bowel function. Patients perceived absolute risks of adverse outcome to be lower than healthcare providers and were quite willing undergo organ preservation to achieve a better prospect of quality of life.ConclusionPatients' preferences in treatment of early rectal cancer vary between patients and frequently differ from assumptions of preferences by healthcare providers. To optimize future shared decision-making, healthcare providers should be aware of these differences and should invite patients to explore and address their priorities more explicitly during consultation. Factors deemed important by both physicians and patients should be expressed during consultation to decide on a tailored treatment strategy. Show less
Smits, L.J.H.; Lieshout, A.S. van; Bosker, R.J.I.; Crobach, S.; Graaf, E.J.R. de; Hage, M.; ... ; TESAR Res Grp 2023
Introduction: In early rectal cancer, organ sparing treatment strategies such as local excision have gained popularity. The necessity of radical surgery is based on the histopathological evaluation... Show moreIntroduction: In early rectal cancer, organ sparing treatment strategies such as local excision have gained popularity. The necessity of radical surgery is based on the histopathological evaluation of the local excision specimen. This study aimed to describe diagnostic variability between pathologists, and its impact on treatment allocation in patients with locally excised early rectal cancer. Materials and methods: Patients with locally excised pT1-2 rectal cancer were included in this prospective cohort study. Both quantitative measures and histopathological risk factors (i.e. poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion, and lymphatic- or venous invasion) were evaluated. Interobserver variability was reported by both percentages and Fleiss' Kappa- (k) or intra-class correlation coefficients. Results: A total of 126 patients were included. Ninety-four percent of the original histopathological reports contained all required parameters. In 73 of the 126 (57.9%) patients, at least one discordant parameter was observed, which regarded histopathological risk factors for lymph node metastases in 36 patients (28.6%). Interobserver agreement among different variables varied between 74% and 95% or k 0.530-0.962. The assessment of lymphovascular invasion showed discordances in 26% (k 1/4 0.530, 95% CI 0.375-0.684) of the cases. In fourteen (11%) patients, discordances led to a change in treatment strategy. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that there is substantial interobserver variability between pathologists, especially in the assessment of lymphovascular invasion. Pathologists play a key role in treatment allocation after local excision of early rectal cancer, therefore interobserver variability needs to be reduced to decrease the number of patients that are over- or undertreated. & COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Show less
Hoorn, S. ten; Waasdorp, C.; Oijen, M.G.H. van; Damhofer, H.; Trinh, A.; Zhao, L.; ... ; Bijlsma, M.F. 2022
Background Recently it has been recognized that stromal markers could be used as a clinically relevant biomarker for therapy response and prognosis. Here, we report on a serum marker for stromal... Show moreBackground Recently it has been recognized that stromal markers could be used as a clinically relevant biomarker for therapy response and prognosis. Here, we report on a serum marker for stromal activation, A Disintegrin and Metalloprotease 12 (ADAM12) in colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods Using gene expression databases we investigated ADAM12 expression in CRC and delineated the source of ADAM12 expression. The clinical value of ADAM12 was retrospectively assessed in the CAIRO2 trial in metastatic CRC with 235 patients (31% of total cohort), and an independent rectal cancer cohort (n = 20). Results ADAM12 is expressed by activated CRC associated fibroblasts. In the CAIRO2 trial cohort, ADAM12 serum levels were prognostic (ADAM12 low versus ADAM12 high; median OS 25.3 vs. 17.1 months, HR 1.48 [95% CI 1.11-1.96], P = 0.007). The prognostic potential was specifically high for metastatic rectal cancer (HR 1.78 [95% CI 1.06-3.00], P = 0.030) and mesenchymal subtype tumors (HR 2.12 [95% CI 1.25-3.60], P = 0.004). ADAM12 also showed potential for predicting recurrence in an exploratory analysis of non-metastatic rectal cancers. Conclusions Here we describe a non-invasive marker for activated stroma in CRC which associates with poor outcome, especially for primary cancers located in the rectum. Show less
