Explore the vast range of titles available.

Key Points Pooled analyses of prospective trials have demonstrated an overall survival benefit of intensive postoperative surveillance in patients with stage I–III colorectal cancer (CRC); however, individual studies used highly heterogeneous surveillance schemes The overall survival benefit of intensive surveillance is only partly due to improved cancer-specific survival; other contributing factors include the treatment of comorbidities owing to frequent contact with medical professionals For patients with stage I–III CRC, no optimal diagnostic tool or frequency of patient visits has been established; regular follow-up assessment by a clinician seem to be the most-important factor Colonoscopies are generally performed at 6, 30 and 60 months after curative treatment of patients with stage I–III CRC; performing additional colonoscopies does not improve overall survival Limited evidence is available regarding surveillance after endoscopic resection of early neoplasia, and after organ-sparing treatment for rectal cancer; prospective randomized trials are needed Similarly, a lack of evidence exists on the effectiveness of surveillance after treatment of patients with stage IV CRC with curative intent, and thus randomized trials are also needed to address this issue After curative treatment, 30% of patients with stage I–III and up to 65% of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) develop recurrent disease. Thus, surveillance for disease recurrence is clearly needed in these patients, but controversy surrounds the optimal follow-up approaches. Herein, the current evidence relating to surveillance strategies for patients with CRC is comprehensively reviewed, and the future development of patient-centred programmes is discussed. Treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC) of all stages have evolved considerably over the past two decades, resulting in improved long-term outcomes. After curative treatment, however, 30% of patients with stage I–III and up to 65% of patients with stage IV CRC develop recurrent disease. Thus, patients are routinely offered surveillance in order to detect disease recurrence at an early, asymptomatic stage, with the intention of improving survival. Nevertheless, controversy continues to surround the optimal surveillance protocols. For patients with stage I–III CRC, more-intensive surveillance improves overall survival compared with less-intensive or no surveillance, probably owing to improved outcomes after cancer recurrence, as well as proactive treatment of other conditions detected opportunistically. The benefit of surveillance after curative treatment of stage IV CRC is more controversial, but might be justified because repeat resection can improve overall survival and 20% of these patients are eligible for such treatment with curative intent. No trials have assessed the optimal follow-up approach after curative resection of metastatic CRC, and similarly to surveillance of patients with stage I–III disease, most programmes are more intensive during the first 3 years than at later time points. Herein, we provide a comprehensive overview of surveillance strategies for patients with CRC, and discuss the future development of patient-centred programmes.

Background The Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer (SANO) trial compares active surveillance with standard oesophagectomy for patients with a clinically complete response (cCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The last patient with a clinically complete response is expected to be included in May 2021. The purpose of this update is to present all amendments to the SANO trial protocol as approved by the Institutional Research Board (IRB) before accrual is completed. Design The SANO trial protocol has been published ( https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4034-1 ). In this ongoing, phase-III, non-inferiority, stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial, patients with cCR (i.e. after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy no evidence of residual disease in two consecutive clinical response evaluations [CREs]) undergo either active surveillance or standard oesophagectomy. In the active surveillance arm, CREs are repeated every 3 months in the first year, every 4 months in the second year, every 6 months in the third year, and yearly in the fourth and fifth year. In this arm, oesophagectomy is offered only to patients in whom locoregional regrowth is highly suspected or proven, without distant metastases. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Update Amendments to the study design involve the first cluster in the stepped-wedge design being partially randomised as well and continued accrual of patients at baseline until the predetermined number of patients with cCR is reached. Eligibility criteria have been amended, stating that patients who underwent endoscopic treatment prior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy cannot be included and that patients who have highly suspected residual tumour without histological proof can be included. Amendments to the study procedures include that patients proceed to the second CRE if at the first CRE the outcome of the pathological assessment is uncertain and that patients with a non-passable stenosis at endoscopy are not considered cCR. The sample size was recalculated following new insights on response rates (34% instead of 50%) and survival (expected 2-year overall survival of 75% calculated from the moment of reaching cCR instead of 3-year overall survival of 67% calculated from diagnosis). This reduced the number of required patients with cCR from 264 to 224, but increased the required inclusions from 480 to approximately 740 patients at baseline. Conclusion Substantial amendments were made prior to closure of enrolment of the SANO trial. These amendments do not affect the outcomes of the trial compared to the original protocol. The first results are expected late 2023. If active surveillance plus surgery as needed after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer leads to non-inferior overall survival compared to standard oesophagectomy, active surveillance can be implemented as a standard of care.

CRC mortality rates are higher for individuals with a lower socioeconomic status (SES). Screening could influence health inequalities. We therefore aimed to investigate SES differences in participation and diagnostic yield of FIT screening. All invitees in 2014 and 2015 in the Dutch national CRC screening programme were included in the analyses. We used area SES as a measure for SES and divided invitees into quintiles, with Quintile 1 being the highest SES. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare the participation rate, positivity rate, colonoscopy uptake, positive predictive value (PPV) and detection rate across the SES groups. Participation to FIT screening was significantly lower for Quintile 5 (67.0%) compared to the other Quintiles (73.0% to 75.1%; adjusted OR quintile 5 versus quintile 1: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.72-0.74), as well as colonoscopy uptake after a positive FIT (adjusted OR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.69-0.77). The detection rate per FIT participant for advanced neoplasia gradually increased from 3.3% in Quintile 1 to 4.0% in Quintile 5 (adjusted OR 1.20%, 95%CI 1.16-1.24). As a result of lower participation, the yield per invitee was similar for Quintile 5 (2.04%) and Quintile 1 (2.00%), both being lower than Quintiles 2 to 4 (2.20%-2.28%). Screening has the potential to reduce health inequalities in CRC mortality, because of a higher detection in participants with a lower SES. However, in the Dutch screening programme, this is currently offset by the lower participation in this group.

Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by esophagectomy is a standard treatment for potentially curable esophageal cancer. Active surveillance in patients with a clinically complete response (cCR) 12 weeks after nCRT is regarded as possible alternative to standard surgery. The aim of this study is to monitor the safety, adherence and effectiveness of active surveillance in patients outside a randomized trial. Methods This nationwide prospective cohort study aims to accrue operable patients with non-metastatic histologically proven adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction. Patients receive nCRT and response evaluation consists of upper endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies, endoscopic ultrasonography plus fine-needle aspiration of suspicious lymph nodes and 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan. When residue or regrowth of tumor in the absence of distant metastases is detected, surgical resection is advised. Patients with cCR after nCRT are suitable to undergo active surveillance. Patients can consult an independent physician or psychologist to support decision-making. Primary endpoint is the number and severity of adverse events in patients with cCR undergoing active surveillance, defined as complications from response evaluations, delayed surgery and the development of distant metastases. Secondary endpoints include timing and quality of diagnostic modalities, overall survival, progression-free survival, fear of cancer recurrence and decisional regret. Discussion Active surveillance after nCRT may be an alternative to standard surgery in patients with esophageal cancer. Similar to organ-sparing approaches applied in other cancer types, the safety and efficacy of active surveillance needs monitoring before data from randomized trials are available. Trial registration The SANO-2 study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04886635 (May 14, 2021) – Retrospectively registered.

Background In 2014, the national population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program was implemented in the Netherlands. Biennial fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for hemoglobin (Hb) is used at a cut-off of 47 µg Hb per gram feces. The CRC screening program successfully started, with high participation rates and yield of screening. Now that the program has reached a steady state, there is potential to further optimize the program. Previous studies showed that prior fecal Hb (f-Hb) concentrations just below the FIT cut-off are associated with a higher risk for detection of advanced neoplasia (AN) at subsequent screening rounds. We aim to achieve a better balance between the harms and benefits of CRC screening by offering participants tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations after negative FIT. Methods This mixed-methods study will be performed within the Dutch national CRC screening program and will consist of: (1) a randomized controlled trial (RCT), (2) focus group studies, and (3) decision modelling. The primary outcome is the yield of AN per screened individual in personalized screening vs. uniform screening. Secondary outcomes are perspectives on, acceptability of and adherence to personalized screening, as well as long-term outcomes of personalized vs. uniform screening. The RCT will include 20,000 participants of the Dutch CRC screening program; 10,000 in the intervention and 10,000 in the control arm. The intervention arm will receive a personalized screening interval based on the prior f-Hb concentration (1, 2 or 3 years). The control arm will receive a screening interval according to current practice (2 years). The focus group studies are designed to understand individuals’ perspectives on and acceptability of personalized CRC screening. Results of the RCT will be incorporated into the MISCAN-Colon model to determine long-term benefits, harms, and costs of personalized vs. uniform CRC screening. Discussion The aim of this study is to evaluate the yield, feasibility, acceptability and (cost-) effectiveness of personalized CRC screening through tailored invitation intervals based on prior f-Hb concentrations. This knowledge may be of guidance for health policy makers and may provide evidence for implementing personalized CRC screening in The Netherlands and/or other countries using FIT as screening modality. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05423886, June 21, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05423886

The current surveillance strategy in Barrett's esophagus (BE) uses only histological findings of the last endoscopy to assess neoplastic progression risk. As predictor values vary across endoscopies, single measurements may not be an accurate reflection. Our aim was to explore the value of using longitudinal evolutions (i.e. successive measurements) of histological findings (low-grade dysplasia (LGD)) and immunohistochemical biomarkers (p53 and SOX2) by investigating the association with Barrett's progression. In this proof-of-principle study of a longitudinal dynamic risk estimation model with a multicenter cohort design, 631 BE patients from 15 Dutch hospitals who were under surveillance were included. Longitudinal dynamic values of LGD, p53, and SOX2 were included in a multivariate joint model to estimate the risk of high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Longitudinal evolutions of aberrant expression of p53 (HR 1.26, p<0.01) and SOX2 (HR 1.43, p<0.01) were associated with an increased HGD/EAC risk. We also found weak evidence of an association with the longitudinal evolution of the presence of LGD (HR 1.02, p = 0.12). The performance of the model was good (AUC 0.80-0.88). Using this model, for each future BE patient the probability of aberrant expression of biomarkers based on multiple longitudinal observations can be estimated. This probability is translated in progression risk, expressed as HR. This study provides solid ground to further explore a paradigm shift from currently recommended fixed intervals towards personalized surveillance, in which tailored risk estimations and corresponding surveillance intervals can be updated at every FU endoscopy for individual BE patients.

In the past decades the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in people under the age of 50 years has increased, which is referred to as early-onset CRC or young-onset CRC (YO-CRC). YO-CRC is expected to account for 11% of colon cancers and 23% of rectal cancers by 2030. This trend is observed in different parts of the world and in both men and women. In 20% of patients with YO-CRC, a hereditary cancer syndrome is found as the underlying cause; however, in the majority of patients no genetic predisposition is present. Beginning in the 1950s, major changes in lifestyle such as antibiotic use, low physical activity and obesity have affected the gut microbiome and may be an important factor in YO-CRC development. Owing to a lack of screening, patients with YO-CRC are often diagnosed with advanced-stage disease. Long-term treatment-related complications should be taken into account in these younger patients, making the more traditional sequential approaches of drug therapy not always the most appropriate option. To better understand the underlying mechanism and define relationships between environmental factors and YO-CRC development, long-term prospective studies are needed with lifestyle data collected from childhood.Young-onset colorectal cancer occurs in individuals younger than 50 years and is increasing in incidence worldwide. This Primer provides an overview of the epidemiology, diagnosis, screening, prevention, pathophysiology and management of this cancer and its impact on patient quality of life.

The COVID-19 pandemic forced colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs to downscale their colonoscopy capacity. In this study, we assessed strategies to deal with temporary restricted colonoscopy capacity in a FIT-based CRC screening program while aiming to retain the maximum possible preventive effect of the screening program. We simulated the Dutch national CRC screening program inviting individuals between ages 55 and 75 for biennial FIT using the MISCAN-Colon model including the 3-month disruption in the first half of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For the second half of 2020 and 2021, we simulated three different strategies for the total target population: 1) increasing the FIT cut-off, 2) skipping one screening for specific screening ages, and 3) extending the screening interval. We estimated the impact on required colonoscopy capacity in 2020-2021 and life years (LYs) lost in the long-term. Increasing the FIT cut-off, skipping screening ages and extending the screening interval resulted in a maximum reduction of 25,100 (-17.0%), 16,100(-10.9%) and 19,000 (-12.9%) colonoscopies, respectively. Modelling an increased FIT cut-off, the number of LYs lost ranged between 1,400 and 4,400. Skipping just a single screening age resulted in approximately 2,700 LYs lost and this was doubled in case of skipping two screening ages. Extending the screening interval up to 34 months had the smallest impact on LYs lost (up to 1,100 LYs lost). This modelling study shows that to anticipate on restricted colonoscopy capacity, temporarily extending the screening interval retains the maximum possible preventive effect of the CRC screening program.

Background After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal cancer, high pathologically complete response (pCR) rates are being achieved especially in patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). An active surveillance strategy has been proposed for SCC patients with clinically complete response (cCR) after nCRT. To justify omitting surgical resection, patients with residual disease should be accurately identified. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of response evaluations after nCRT based on the preSANO trial, including positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET-CT), endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in patients with potentially curable esophageal SCC. Methods Operable esophageal SCC patients who are planned to undergo nCRT according to the CROSS regimen and are planned to undergo surgery will be recruited from four Asian centers. Four to 6 weeks after completion of nCRT, patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-1) consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies. In patients without histological evidence of residual tumor (i.e. without positive biopsies), surgery will be postponed another 6 weeks. A second clinical response evaluation (CRE-2) will be performed 10–12 weeks after completion of nCRT, consisting of PET-CT, endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and EUS with FNA. Immediately after CRE-2 all patients without evidence of distant metastases will undergo esophagectomy. Results of CRE-1 and CRE-2 as well as results of the three single diagnostic modalities will be correlated to pathological response in the resection specimen (gold standard) for calculation of sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value. Discussion If the current study shows that major locoregional residual disease (> 10% residual carcinoma or any residual nodal disease) can be accurately (i.e. with sensitivity of 80.5%) detected in patients with esophageal SCC, a prospective trial will be conducted comparing active surveillance with standard esophagectomy in patients with a clinically complete response after nCRT (SINO trial). Trial registration The preSINO trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03937362 (May 3, 2019).

The low incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in Barrett's oesophagus (BE) patients reinforces the need for risk stratification tools to make BE surveillance more effective. Therefore, we have undertaken a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies on immunohistochemical (IHC) biomarkers in BE to determine the value of IHC biomarkers as neoplastic predictors in BE surveillance. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, Pubmed publisher, and Google scholar. All studies on IHC biomarkers in BE surveillance were included. ORs were extracted and meta-analyses performed with a random effects model. 16 different IHC biomarkers were studied in 36 studies. These studies included 425 cases and 1835 controls. A meta- analysis was performed for p53, aspergillus oryzae lectin (AOL), Cyclin A, Cyclin D and alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase. Aberrant p53 expression was significantly associated with an increased risk of neoplastic progression with an OR of 3.18 (95% CI 1.68 to 6.03). This association was confirmed for both non-dysplastic BE and BE with low-grade dysplasia (LGD). Another promising biomarker to predict neoplastic progression was AOL, with an OR of 3.04 (95% CI 2.05 to 4.49). Use of p53 IHC staining may improve risk stratification in BE surveillance. Aberrant p53 expression in BE patients appeared to be associated with a significantly increased risk of neoplastic progression for both non-dysplastic and LGD BE patients.