| Literature DB >> 31737121 |
Yibo Cai1, Xingang Lu1, Xiu Zhu2, Haixing Ju1, Wenyong Sun2, Wei Wu2.
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the variation in tumor regression grade (TRG) and peritumoral lymphocytic infiltration of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).Entities:
Keywords: Colorectal liver metastases; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; pathological response; peritumoral lymphocytic infiltration.; tumor regression grading
Year: 2019 PMID: 31737121 PMCID: PMC6843876 DOI: 10.7150/jca.31493
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Figure 1Lymphocytic infiltration at the tumor-normal interface and the pattern of variation in TRG between metastases. A. Dense TILs: dense lymphocytes were encountered surrounding liver metastases (>50/HPF). B. Weak TILs: scanty lymphocytes were observed surrounding liver metastases (≤ 50/HPF). C. Patients were subcategorized into two groups according to whether TRG scores of the second-worse metastases decreased or remained stable.
Clinicopathological characteristics of colorectal cancer with liver metastases undergoing liver resection followed by preoperative chemotherapy.
| Variables | Overall (n=98) | TRG 1-3 (n=41) | TRG 4-5 (n=57) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD), years | 53.9 (12.4) | 54.9 (13.2) | 53.1 (11.9) | 0.497† |
| 0.470‡ | ||||
| Male | 58 (59.2 %) | 26 (63.4 %) | 32 (56.1 %) | |
| Female | 40 (40.8 %) | 15 (36.6 %) | 25 (43.9 %) | |
| 0.654‡ | ||||
| Right-sided | 26 (26.5 %) | 12 (29.3 %) | 14 (24.6 %) | |
| Left-sided | 26 (26.5 %) | 12 (29.3 %) | 14 (24.6 %) | |
| Rectum | 46 (47.0 %) | 17 (41.4 %) | 29 (50.8 %) | |
| 74/94 (78.7 %) | 31/40 (77.5 %) | 43/54 (79.6 %) | 0.796‡ | |
| 53/94 (56.3 %) | 21/40 (52.5 %) | 32/54 (59.3 %) | 0.514‡ | |
| 65 (66.3 %) | 29 (70.7 %) | 36 (63.2 %) | 0.434‡ | |
| 34.7 (26.1) | 27.5 (25.0) | 39.9 (25.8) | 0.130† | |
| 50 (51.0 %) | 17 (41.5 %) | 33 (57.9 %) | 0.108‡ | |
| 33 (33.7 %) | 14 (34.1 %) | 19 (33.3 %) | 0.933‡ | |
| 62 (63.2 %) | 18 (43.9 %) | 44 (77.2 %) | 0.001‡ | |
| 26 (26.5 %) | 10 (24.3 %) | 16 (28.1 %) | 0.684‡ | |
| 10 (10.2 %) | 4 (9.8 %) | 6 (10.5 %) | 0.901§ | |
| 0.722§ | ||||
| Oxaliplatin | 75 (76.5 %) | 33 (80.5 %) | 42 (73.6 %) | |
| Irinotecan | 15 (15.3 %) | 5 (12.2 %) | 10 (17.5 %) | |
| Oxaliplatin+irinotecan | 8 (8.2 %) | 3 (7.3 %) | 5 (8.8 %) | |
| 0.709‡ | ||||
| Cetuximab | 10 (10.2 %) | 5 (12.2 %) | 5 (8.8 %) | |
| Bevacizumab | 10 (10.2 %) | 5 (12.2 %) | 5 (8.8 %) | |
| Without | 78 (79.6 %) | 31 (75.6 %) | 47 (82.4 %) | |
| 9 (9.2 %) | 3 (7.3 %) | 6 (10.5 %) | -* | |
| 4 (3-7) | 4 (3-6) | 5 (3-8) | 0.214¶ | |
| <0.001‡ | ||||
| Response (CR+PR) | 40 (40.8 %) | 28 (68.3 %) | 12 (21.1 %) | |
| No response (SD+PD) | 58 (59.2 %) | 13 (31.7 %) | 45 (78.9 %) | |
| 9 (9.2 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 9 (15.8 %) | -* | |
| 18 (18.4 %) | 8 (19.5 %) | 10 (17.5 %) | 0.804‡ | |
| 47 (48.0 %) | 14 (34.1 %) | 33 (57.9 %) | 0.144‡ | |
| 54 (55.1 %) | 29 (70.7 %) | 25 (43.8 %) | 0.008‡ | |
| -* | ||||
| 1-3 | 21/40 (52.5 %) | 11/11 (100.0 %) | 10/29 (34.5 %) | |
| 4-5 | 19/40 (47.5 %) | 0/11 (0.0 %) | 19/29 (65.5 %) | |
| 0.153§ | ||||
| Decreased TRG | 17/40 (42.5 %) | 7/11 (63.6 %) | 10/29 (34.5 %) | |
| Stable TRG | 23/40 (57.5 %) | 4/11 (36.4 %) | 19/29 (65.5 %) |
Abbreviations: TRG: tumor regression grade; SD: standard deviation; CRLMs: colorectal liver metastases; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; NACT: neoadjuvant chemotherapy; IQR: interquartile range; CR: complete response; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; PD: progressive disease; TILs: tumor infiltrating lymphocytes.
#Pathologic information of the primary tumor was missing for 4 patients. ##There are 40 patients with multiple CRLMs receiving the evaluation of variability of TRG. †Student's t test. ‡Pearson Chi-square test. § Fisher's exact test. * The statistical analysis was not performed on account of the small sample sizes in subgroup. ¶Wilcoxon rank-sum test.
Information about NACT in patients stratified by the variability of TRG and lymphocytic infiltration.
| Variables | Variability of TRG (n=40) | TILs (n=98) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decreased (n=17) | Stable (n=23) | Dense (n=54) | Weak (n=44) | |
| Oxaliplatin | 14 (45.1 %) | 17 (54.9 %) | 42 (56.0 %) | 33 (44.0 %) |
| Irinotecan | 3 (50.0 %) | 3 (50.0 %) | 9 (60.0 %) | 6 (40.0 %) |
| Oxaliplatin+irinotecan | 0 (0.0 %) | 3 (100.0 %) | 3 (37.5 %) | 5 (62.5 %) |
| Cetuximab | 4 (66.7 %) | 2 (33.3 %) | 6 (60.0 %) | 4 (40.0 %) |
| Bevacizumab | 2 (40.0 %) | 3 (60.0 %) | 7 (70.0 %) | 3 (30.0 %) |
| Without | 11 (37.9 %) | 18 (62.1%) | 41 (52.6) | 37 (47.4%) |
| 3 (75.0 %) | 1 (25.0 %) | 6 (50.0 %) | 6 (50.0 %) | |
| 6 | 4 | 5 | 4 | |
| Response (CR+PR) | 11 (61.1 %) | 7 (38.9 %) | 32 (80.0 %) | 8 (20.0 %) |
| No response (SD+PD) | 6 (27.3 %) | 16 (72.7 %) | 22 (37.9 %) | 36 (62.1 %) |
| P value | 0.031† | <0.001† | ||
Abbreviations: TRG, Tumor regression grade; TILs, Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes; NACT, Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; CR, Complete response; PR, Partial response; SD, Stable disease; PD, Progressive disease.
† Pearson Chi-square test.
Potential predictors for recurrence-free survival and overall survival in colorectal cancer with liver metastasis undergoing liver resection followed by preoperative chemotherapy.
| Variable (n=97) * | Recurrence-free survival | Overall survival | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate | Multivariate † | Univariate | Multivariate † | |||||
| 3-year RFS | P | HR (95% CI) | P | 3-year OS | P | HR (95% CI) | P | |
| Overall | 27.8 % | 52.5 % | ||||||
| Lymph nodes status # | ||||||||
| Negative (n=40) | 47.6 % | 0.006 | 1 (Reference) | 65.9 % | 0.020 | 1 (Reference) | ||
| Positive (n=53) | 14.7 % | 1.85 (1.06-3.22) | 0.030 | 44.1 % | 2.47 (1.22-5.02) | 0.012 | ||
| Number of metastases | ||||||||
| 1 (n=47) | 45.0 % | <0.001 | 1 (Reference) | 60.6 % | 0.037 | 1 (Reference) | ||
| ≥ 2 (n=50) | 11.5 % | 1.85 (1.06-3.24) | 0.030 | 43.6 % | 1.40 (0.69-2.85) | 0.354 | ||
| Wild (n=71) | 28.9 % | 0.103 | - | 58.4 % | 0.091 | 1 (Reference) | ||
| Mutated (n=26) | 23.9 % | - | 35.8 % | 2.04 (1.01-4.14) | 0.047 | |||
| TRG | ||||||||
| 1-3 (n=40) | 42.3 % | 0.002 | 1 (Reference) | 74.6 % | 0.002 | 1 (Reference) | ||
| 4-5 (n=57) | 18.4 % | 2.43 (1.33-4.46) | 0.004 | 37.3 % | 2.24 (1.06-4.70) | 0.016 | ||
Abbreviations: RFS: recurrence-free survival; OS: overall survival; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; TRG: tumor regression grade. *Survival data is from 97 patients and 1 patient was lost of follow-up. † HR was adjusted by the lymph modes status, number of metastases, targeted therapy, radiological response, TRG, bilobar liver metastases, resection margin in multivariate analyses of RFS and adjusted by the lymph modes status, number of metastases, KRAS status, radiological response, TRG in OS.
#Pathologic information of the primary tumor was missing for 4 patients and 1 patient was lost of follow-up.
Figure 2Comparison of survival curves of patients with pathological response (TRG 1-3) or no response (TRG 4-5) in liver colorectal metastasis treated by NACT. A. Recurrence-free survival of patients with complete clinical follow-up. B. Overall survival of patients with complete clinical follow-up.
Figure 3Comparison of recurrence-free survival curves of patients after NACT according to the lymphocytic infiltration at the tumor-normal interface and variation in TRG scores between metastases. A. Recurrence-free survival of patients presented with decreased or stable TRG scores of the second-worse metastases. B. Recurrence-free survival of patients presented with dense or weak TILs at the tumor-normal interface combining with histological tumor regression.
Additional histopathological predictors for recurrence-free survival and overall survival in patients with different TRG undergoing liver resection after preoperative chemotherapy.
| Variable (n=97) * | Recurrence-free survival | Overall survival | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3-year RFS/Adjusted HR† P | 3-year OS/Adjusted HR† P | |||
| 1-3 (n=21) | 1(Reference) | 57.6 % | 0.791 | |
| 4-5 (n=19) | 1.35 (0.58-3.10) | 0.485 | 46.9 % | |
| Stable (n=17) | 1(Reference) | 49.0 % | 0.577 | |
| Decreased (n=23) | 0.42 (0.19-0.94) | 0.034 | 56.6 % | |
| <50% (n=79) | 27.6 % | 0.434 | 56.1 % | 0.272 |
| ≥ 50% (n=18) | 27.8 % | 43.8 % | ||
| Weak (n=43) | 24.9 % | 0.248 | 55.0 % | 0.833 |
| Dense (n=54) | 29.9 % | 52.5 % | ||
| No (n=50) | 32.6 % | 0.353 | 59.8 % | 0.416 |
| Yes (n=47) | 23.2 % | 47.6 % | ||
Abbreviations: TRG: tumor regression grade; RFS: recurrence-free survival; OS: overall survival; HR: hazard ratio; TILs: tumor infiltrating lymphocytes; NA: not acceptable.*Survival data is from 97 patients and one patient was lost of follow up.
†HR was adjusted by the lymph node status, number of metastases, targeted therapy, TRG in multivariate analyses of RFS and adjusted by the lymph modes status, KRAS status, TRG in OS. #There are 40 patients with multiple CRLMs receiving the evaluation of variability of TRG.