Clinicopathological analysis of colorectal cancer: a comparison between emergency and elective surgical cases

Sam Ghazi, Elisabeth Berg, Annika Lindblom, Ulrik Lindforss, Low-Risk Colorectal Cancer Study Group, David Edler, Claes Lenander, Johan Dalén, Fredrik Hjern, Nils Lundqvist, Martin Janson, Susanne Ekelund, Sam Ghazi, Elisabeth Berg, Annika Lindblom, Ulrik Lindforss, Low-Risk Colorectal Cancer Study Group, David Edler, Claes Lenander, Johan Dalén, Fredrik Hjern, Nils Lundqvist, Martin Janson, Susanne Ekelund

Abstract

Background: Approximately 15 to 30% of colorectal cancers present as an emergency, most often as obstruction or perforation. Studies report poorer outcome for patients who undergo emergency compared with elective surgery, both for their initial hospital stay and their long-term survival. Advanced tumor pathology and tumors with unfavorable histologic features may provide the basis for the difference in outcome. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and pathologic profiles of emergency and elective surgical cases for colorectal cancer, and relate these to gender, age group, tumor location, and family history of the disease. The main outcome measure was the difference in morphology between elective and emergency surgical cases.

Methods: In total, 976 tumors from patients treated surgically for colorectal cancer between 2004 and 2006 in Stockholm County, Sweden (8 hospitals) were analyzed in the study. Seventeen morphological features were examined and compared with type of operation (elective or emergency), gender, age, tumor location, and family history of colorectal cancer by re-evaluating the histopathologic features of the tumors.

Results: In a univariate analysis, the following characteristics were found more frequently in emergency compared with elective cases: multiple tumors, higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), tumor (T) and node (N) stage, peri-tumor lymphocytic reaction, high number of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, signet-ring cell mucinous carcinoma, desmoplastic stromal reaction, vascular and perineural invasion, and infiltrative tumor margin (P<0.0001 for AJCC stage III to IV, N stage 1 to 2/3, and vascular invasion). In a multivariate analysis, all these differences, with the exception of peri-tumor lymphocytic reaction, remained significant (P<0.0001 for multiple tumors, perineural invasion, infiltrative tumor margin, AJCC stage III, and N stage 1 to 2/3).

Conclusions: Colorectal cancers that need surgery as an emergency case generally show a more aggressive histopathologic profile and a more advanced stage than do elective cases. Essentially, no difference was seen in location, and therefore it is likely there would be no differences in macro-environment either. Our results could indicate that colorectal cancers needing emergency surgery belong to an inherently specific group with a different etiologic or genetic background.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Percentages of tumors at each location for the elective and emergency surgery cases. The percentage of tumors was calculated for each location (cecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure, transverse colon, splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid, and rectum) for (A) the elective and (B) emergency surgery cases. Cases in the appendix were omitted from both groups (n = 1 and n = 2 respectively).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Poorly differentiated mucinous colorectal cancer (CRC) of the signet-ring cell type. (A) Tumor displaying large dissecting mucus pools filled with tumor cells. (B) Same tumor at higher magnification showing signet-ring cells with a large cytoplasmic mucin vacuole and a dislocated nucleus at the periphery. Hematoxylin and eosin, original magnification (A) ×25; (B) ×200.

References

    1. Scott NA, Jeacock J, Kingston RD. Risk factors in patients presenting as an emergency with colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 1995;11(3):321–323. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800820311.
    1. Wong SK, Jalaludin BB, Morgan MJ, Berthelsen AS, Morgan A, Gatenby AH, Fulham SB. Tumor pathology and long-term survival in emergency colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;11(2):223–230. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9094-2.
    1. Carraro PG, Segala M, Cesana BM, Tiberio G. Obstructing colonic cancer: failure and survival patterns over a ten-year follow-up after one-stage curative surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;11(2):243–250. doi: 10.1007/BF02234300.
    1. Lee YM, Law WL, Chu KW, Poon RT. Emergency surgery for obstructing colorectal cancers: a comparison between right-sided and left-sided lesions. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;11(6):719–725. doi: 10.1016/S1072-7515(01)00833-X.
    1. Bass G, Fleming C, Conneely J, Martin Z, Mealy K. Emergency first presentation of colorectal cancer predicts significantly poorer outcomes: a review of 356 consecutive Irish patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;11(4):678–684. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181a1d8c9.
    1. McArdle CS, Hole DJ. Emergency presentation of colorectal cancer is associated with poor 5-year survival. Br J Surg. 2004;11(5):605–609. doi: 10.1002/bjs.4456.
    1. Metcalfe MS, Norwood MG, Miller AS, Hemingway D. Unreasonable expectations in emergency colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2005;11(3):275–278. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00784.x.
    1. Biondo S, Marti-Rague J, Kreisler E, Pares D, Martin A, Navarro M, Pareja L, Jaurrieta E. A prospective study of outcomes of emergency and elective surgeries for complicated colonic cancer. Am J Surg. 2005;11(4):377–383. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.01.009.
    1. Chen HS, Sheen-Chen SM. Obstruction and perforation in colorectal adenocarcinoma: an analysis of prognosis and current trends. Surgery. 2000;11(4):370–376. doi: 10.1067/msy.2000.104674.
    1. Lee IK, Sung NY, Lee YS, Lee SC, Kang WK, Cho HM, Ahn CH, Lee do S, Oh ST, Kim JG, Jeon HM, Chang SK. The survival rate and prognostic factors in 26 perforated colorectal cancer patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007;11(5):467–473. doi: 10.1007/s00384-006-0184-8.
    1. Mulcahy HE, Skelly MM, Husain A, O’Donoghue DP. Long-term outcome following curative surgery for malignant large bowel obstruction. Br J Surg. 1996;11(1):46–50. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800830114.
    1. Abdelrazeq AS, Scott N, Thorn C, Verbeke CS, Ambrose NS, Botterill ID, Jayne DG. The impact of spontaneous tumour perforation on outcome following colon cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2008;11(8):775–780. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01412.x.
    1. Ghazi S, Lindforss U, Lindberg G, Berg E, Lindblom A, Papadogiannakis N. Analysis of colorectal cancer morphology in relation to sex, age, location, and family history. J Gastroenterol. 2012;11:619–634. doi: 10.1007/s00535-011-0520-9.
    1. Khan S, Pawlak SE, Eggenberger JC, Lee CS, Szilagy EJ, Margolin DA. Acute colonic perforation associated with colorectal cancer. Am Surg. 2001;11(3):261–264.
    1. Novy S, Rogers LF, Kirkpatrick W. Diastatic rupture of the cecum in obstruction carcinoma of the left colon. Radiographic diagnosis and surgical implications. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1975;11(2):281–286. doi: 10.2214/ajr.123.2.281.
    1. Borger ME, Gosens MJ, Jeuken JW, van Kempen LC, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH, Nagtegaal ID. Signet ring cell differentiation in mucinous colorectal carcinoma. J Pathol. 2007;11(3):278–286. doi: 10.1002/path.2181.
    1. Fink D, Aebi S, Howell SB. The role of DNA mismatch repair in drug resistance. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;11(1):1–6.
    1. Gopalan V, Smith RA, Ho YH, Lam AK. Signet-ring cell carcinoma of colorectum–current perspectives and molecular biology. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;11(2):127–133. doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-1037-z.
    1. Gryfe R, Kim H, Hsieh ET, Aronson MD, Holowaty EJ, Bull SB, Redston M, Gallinger S. Tumor microsatellite instability and clinical outcome in young patients with colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;11(2):69–77. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200001133420201.
    1. Jass JR. Role of the pathologist in the diagnosis of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Dis Markers. 2004;11(4–5):215–224.
    1. Smyrk TC, Watson P, Kaul K, Lynch HT. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are a marker for microsatellite instability in colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2001;11(12):2417–2422. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010615)91:12<2417::AID-CNCR1276>;2-U.
    1. Ward R, Meagher A, Tomlinson I, O’Connor T, Norrie M, Wu R, Hawkins N. Microsatellite instability and the clinicopathological features of sporadic colorectal cancer. Gut. 2001;11(6):821–829. doi: 10.1136/gut.48.6.821.
    1. Kim H, Jen J, Vogelstein B, Hamilton SR. Clinical and pathological characteristics of sporadic colorectal carcinomas with DNA replication errors in microsatellite sequences. Am J Pathol. 1994;11(1):148–156.
    1. Lindblom A, Ghazi S, Liu T, Papadogiannakis N. Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal Cancer (HNPCC) Research Trends. 2006;11:21–31.
    1. Deschoolmeester V, Baay M, Van Marck E, Weyler J, Vermeulen P, Lardon F, Vermorken JB. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes: an intriguing player in the survival of colorectal cancer patients. BMC Immunol. 2010;11:19. doi: 10.1186/1471-2172-11-19.
    1. Liang P, Nakada I, Hong JW, Tabuchi T, Motohashi G, Takemura A, Nakachi T, Kasuga T. Prognostic significance of immunohistochemically detected blood and lymphatic vessel invasion in colorectal carcinoma: its impact on prognosis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;11(2):470–477. doi: 10.1245/s10434-006-9189-3.
    1. Newland RC, Dent OF, Lyttle MN, Chapuis PH, Bokey EL. Pathologic determinants of survival associated with colorectal cancer with lymph node metastases. A multivariate analysis of 579 patients. Cancer. 1994;11(8):2076–2082. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19940415)73:8<2076::AID-CNCR2820730811>;2-6.
    1. Tsai HL, Cheng KI, Lu CY, Kuo CH, Ma CJ, Wu JY, Chai CY, Hsieh JS, Wang JY. Prognostic significance of depth of invasion, vascular invasion and numbers of lymph node retrievals in combination for patients with stage II colorectal cancer undergoing radical resection. J Surg Oncol. 2008;11(5):383–387. doi: 10.1002/jso.20942.
    1. Zlobec I, Holler S, Tornillo L, Terracciano L, Lugli A. Combined histomorphologic and immunohistochemical phenotype to predict the presence of vascular invasion in colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;11(6):1114–1121. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e31819eefd9.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir