Adjuvant Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in Stage II to III Colon Cancer: Updated 10-Year Survival and Outcomes According to BRAF Mutation and Mismatch Repair Status of the MOSAIC Study.

PURPOSE: The MOSAIC (Multicenter International Study of Oxaliplatin/Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in the Adjuvant Treatment of Colon Cancer) study has demonstrated 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 6-year overall survival (OS) benefit of adjuvant oxaliplatin in stage II to III resected colon cancer. This update presents 10-year OS and OS and DFS by mismatch repair (MMR) status and BRAF mutation. METHODS: Survival actualization after 10-year follow-up was performed in 2,246 patients with resected stage II to III colon cancer. We assessed MMR status and BRAF mutation in 1,008 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 9.5 years, 10-year OS rates in the bolus/infusional fluorouracil plus leucovorin (LV5FU2) and LV5FU2 plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) arms were 67.1% versus 71.7% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; P = .043) in the whole population, 79.5% versus 78.4% for stage II (HR, 1.00; P = .980), and 59.0% versus 67.1% for stage III (HR, 0.80; P = .016) disease. Ninety-five patients (9.4%) had MMR-deficient (dMMR) tumors, and 94 (10.4%) had BRAF mutation. BRAF mutation was not prognostic for OS (P = .965), but dMMR was an independent prognostic factor (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.15 to 3.55; P = .014). HRs for DFS and OS benefit in the FOLFOX4 arm were 0.48 (95% CI, 0.20 to 1.12) and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.16 to 1.07), respectively, in patients with stage II to III dMMR and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.25 to 1.00) and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.42), respectively, in those with BRAF mutation. CONCLUSION: The OS benefit of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy, increasing over time and with the disease severity, was confirmed at 10 years in patients with stage II to III colon cancer. These updated results support the use of FOLFOX in patients with stage III disease, including those with dMMR or BRAF mutation.

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are essential in implementing and maintaining nationwide stage-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards. In 2011, the first German expert consensus guideline defined the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced esophagogastric cancers. Here, we compare this guideline with other national guidelines as well as current literature. METHODS: The German S3-guideline used an approved development process with de novo literature research, international guideline adaptation, or good clinical practice. Other recent evidence-based national guidelines and current references were compared with German recommendations. RESULTS: In the German S3 and other Western guidelines, adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) are classified according to formerly defined AEG I-III subgroups due to the high surgical impact. To stage local disease, computed tomography of the chest and abdomen and endosonography are reinforced. In contrast, laparoscopy is optional for staging. Mucosal cancers (T1a) should be endoscopically resected "en-bloc" to allow complete histological evaluation of lateral and basal margins. For locally advanced cancers of the stomach or esophagogastric junction (≥T3N+), preferred treatment is preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Preoperative radiochemotherapy is an evidence-based alternative for large AEG type I-II tumors (≥T3N+). Additionally, some experts recommend treating T2 tumors with a similar approach, mainly because pretherapeutic staging is often considered to be unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: The German S3 guideline represents an up-to-date European position with regard to diagnosis, staging, and treatment recommendations for patients with locally advanced esophagogastric cancer. Effects of perioperative chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy are still to be investigated for adenocarcinoma of the cardia and the lower esophagus.

Poorly differentiated clusters (PDC) in colorectal cancer: what is and ought to be known.

BACKGROUND: The counting of poorly differentiated clusters of 5 or more cancer cells lacking a gland-like structure in a tumor mass has recently been identified among the histological features predictive of poor prognosis in colorectal cancer. MAIN BODY: Poorly differentiated clusters can easily be recognized in the histological sections of colorectal cancer routinely stained with haematoxylin and eosin. Despite some limitations related to specimen fragmentation, counting can also be assessed in endoscopic biopsies. Based on the number of poorly differentiated clusters that appear under a microscopic field of a ×20 objective lens (i.e., a microscopic field with a major axis of 1 mm), colorectal cancer can be graded into malignancies as follows: tumors with <5 clusters as grade 1, tumors with 5 to 9 clusters as grade 2, and tumors with ≥10 clusters as grade 3. High poorly differentiated cluster counts are significantly associated with peri-neural and lympho-vascular invasion, the presence of nodal metastases or micrometastases, as well as shorter overall and progression free survival to colorectal cancer. CONCLUSION: The morphological aspects and clinical relevance of poorly differentiated clusters counting in colorectal cancer are discussed in this review.