Nagtegaal, Irıs D.

Abstract Background The tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) classification at pathological evaluation determines prognosis following cancer treatment. For rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, whether ypTNM likely confers different prognosis than pTNM. We compared survival outcomes of patients classified by ypTNM vs pTNM staging. Methods Patients with resected locoregional rectal cancer from the National Cancer Database who underwent upfront surgery (pTNM) and had ≥5 years follow-up (2010-2017) were compared with those receiving neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery (ypTNM). To address treatment selection bias, analyses were stratified by receipt of guideline-concordant care. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results Of 50 436 patients (median age = 60; 61.4% male), 11 732 (23.3%) underwent upfront surgery and 38 704 (76.7%) received neoadjuvant therapy; 78.8% of the upfront surgery group received guideline-concordant care. In analyses stratified by guideline-concordant care, overall survival was similar for stage 0-I (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.15) but significantly worse for ypTNM vs pTNM in stage II (HR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.27 to 1.77; 5-year OS = 75.6% vs 83.2%) and stage III (HR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.75; 5-year OS = 67.0% vs 78.2%). Multivariable analysis confirmed ypTNM was associated with worse survival at each stage (stage 0-I: HR = 1.14, P = .004; stage II: HR = 1.49, P < .001; stage III: HR = 1.60, P < .001). Conclusion Stage for stage, ypTNM classification is associated with worse survival than pTNM classification, with increasing difference at higher stages. Future staging systems and management guidelines should account for these differences to optimize prognostication and stratification for clinical trials and surveillance strategies.

AimsWe compiled two cohorts of colorectal adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) to describe its histologic and molecular aspects using modern parameters to compare them with literature reports using meta‐analysis of cohorts and individual case series.Methods and ResultsWe identified 53 colorectal ASC from 19 North American academic medical centres, in addition to national database reports on 94 Dutch cases. We analysed available clinical, histologic, and immunohistochemical features and patient outcome. ASC comprised 0.02% of colorectal cancers in the Dutch database. The median cohort patient ages at resection were 65 and 69 years (North American and Dutch cohorts, respectively), with a roughly equal male:female ratio. The squamous component represented between 5% and 95% of each tumour, with a median of 50%. Tumour‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were generally low (66%), and tumour budding was often Bd1 (64%). Most cases were pT3 (55%) or pT4 (40%), with nodal metastases in more than half (58%). Twenty‐three cases (43%) metastasized distantly, most commonly to the liver. Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency was identified in 34% of the cases. Follow‐up was available for 48 patients; 13 (27%) had recurrent disease and 29 (60%) died. A total of 31 patients progressed, with median time to progression of 18 months. Available data for the Dutch cohort revealed largely similar findings, as did review of cases in the literature.ConclusionColorectal ASC usually presents at an advanced stage. Despite high rates of MMR deficiency and low tumour budding, TILs were generally low, and there is a high recurrence rate and poor prognosis.

AbstractThe WHO Classification of Tumours provides the international standards for the classification and diagnosis of tumours. It enables direct comparisons to be made between different countries. In the new fifth edition, the series has gone digital with the launch of a website as well as a series of books, known widely as the WHO Blue Books. The first volume to be produced is on the classification of Digestive System tumours, replacing the successful 2010 version. It has been rewritten and updated accordingly. This article summarises the major diagnostic innovations that have occurred over the last decade and that have now been incorporated in the classification. As an example, it incorporates the recently proposed classification of neuroendocrine tumours, based on the recognition that neuroendocrine tumours and carcinomas differ substantially in the genetic abnormalities that drive their growth, findings relevant to treatment selection and outcome prediction. Several themes have emerged during the production process. One is the importance of the progression from hyperplasia to dysplasia to carcinoma in the evolution of the malignant process. Advances in imaging techniques and endoscopy have resulted in enhanced access to precancerous lesions in the gastrointestinal and biliary tract, necessitating both changes in classification schema and clinical practice. Diagnosis of tumours is no longer the sole purview of pathologists, and some patients now receive treatment before tissue is obtained, based on clinical, radiological and liquid biopsy results. This makes the classification relevant to many disciplines involved in the care of patients with tumours of the digestive system.

Abstract The American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union Internationale Contre le Cancer ( AJCC / UICC ) TNM staging system provides the most reliable guidelines for the routine prognostication and treatment of colorectal carcinoma. This traditional tumour staging summarizes data on tumour burden (T), the presence of cancer cells in draining and regional lymph nodes (N) and evidence for distant metastases (M). However, it is now recognized that the clinical outcome can vary significantly among patients within the same stage. The current classification provides limited prognostic information and does not predict response to therapy. Multiple ways to classify cancer and to distinguish different subtypes of colorectal cancer have been proposed, including morphology, cell origin, molecular pathways, mutation status and gene expression‐based stratification. These parameters rely on tumour‐cell characteristics. Extensive literature has investigated the host immune response against cancer and demonstrated the prognostic impact of the in situ immune cell infiltrate in tumours. A methodology named ‘Immunoscore’ has been defined to quantify the in situ immune infiltrate. In colorectal cancer, the Immunoscore may add to the significance of the current AJCC / UICC TNM classification, since it has been demonstrated to be a prognostic factor superior to the AJCC / UICC TNM classification. An international consortium has been initiated to validate and promote the Immunoscore in routine clinical settings. The results of this international consortium may result in the implementation of the Immunoscore as a new component for the classification of cancer, designated TNM ‐I ( TNM ‐Immune). © 2013 The Authors. Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.