OncoSurge: A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer

Graeme J. Poston, René Adam, Steven Robert Alberts, Steven Curley, Juan Figueras, Daniel Haller, Francis Kunstlinger, Gilles Mentha, Bernard Nordlinger, Yehuda Patt, John Primrose, Mark Roh, Philippe Rougier, Theo Ruers, Hans Joachim Schmoll, Carlos Valls, Nick Jean Nicolas Vauthey, Marleen Cornelis, James P. Kahan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

210 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Most patients with colorectal liver metastases present to general surgeons and oncologists without a specialist interest in their management. Since treatment strategy is frequently dependent on the response to earlier treatments, our aim was to create a therapeutic decision model identifying appropriate procedure sequences. Methods: We used the RAND Corporation/ University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method (RAM) assessing strategies of resection, local ablation and chemotherapy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated appropriateness of each treatment option for a total of 1,872 ratings decisions in 252 cases. A decision model was constructed, consensus measured and results validated using 48 virtual cases, and 34 real cases with known outcomes. Results: Consensus was achieved with overall agreement rates of 93.4 to 99.1%. Absolute resection contraindications included unresectable extrahepatic disease, more than 70% liver involvement, liver failure, and being surgically unfit. Factors not influencing treatment strategy were age, primary tumor stage, timing of metastases detection, past blood transfusion, liver resection type, pre-resection carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and previous hepatectomy. Immediate resection was appropriate with adequate radiologically-defined resection margins and no portal adenopathy; other factors included presence of ≤ 4 or > 4 metastases and unilobar or bilobar involvement. Resection was appropriate postchemotherapy, independent of tumor response in the case of ≤ 4 metastases and unilobar liver involvement. Resection was appropriate only for > 4 metastases or bilobar liver involvement, after tumor shrinkage with chemotherapy. When possible, resection was preferred to local ablation. Conclusion: The results were incorporated into a decision matrix, creating a computer program (OncoSurge). This model identifies individual patient resectability, recommending optimal treatment strategies. It may also be used for medical education.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7125-7134
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume23
Issue number28
DOIs
StatePublished - 2005

Fingerprint

Colorectal Neoplasms
Neoplasm Metastasis
Liver
Therapeutics
Drug Therapy
Neoplasms
Los Angeles
Carcinoembryonic Antigen
Liver Failure
Hepatectomy
Medical Education
Blood Transfusion
Software

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

OncoSurge : A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer. / Poston, Graeme J.; Adam, René; Alberts, Steven Robert; Curley, Steven; Figueras, Juan; Haller, Daniel; Kunstlinger, Francis; Mentha, Gilles; Nordlinger, Bernard; Patt, Yehuda; Primrose, John; Roh, Mark; Rougier, Philippe; Ruers, Theo; Schmoll, Hans Joachim; Valls, Carlos; Vauthey, Nick Jean Nicolas; Cornelis, Marleen; Kahan, James P.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 23, No. 28, 2005, p. 7125-7134.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Poston, GJ, Adam, R, Alberts, SR, Curley, S, Figueras, J, Haller, D, Kunstlinger, F, Mentha, G, Nordlinger, B, Patt, Y, Primrose, J, Roh, M, Rougier, P, Ruers, T, Schmoll, HJ, Valls, C, Vauthey, NJN, Cornelis, M & Kahan, JP 2005, 'OncoSurge: A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer', Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 23, no. 28, pp. 7125-7134. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.08.722
Poston, Graeme J. ; Adam, René ; Alberts, Steven Robert ; Curley, Steven ; Figueras, Juan ; Haller, Daniel ; Kunstlinger, Francis ; Mentha, Gilles ; Nordlinger, Bernard ; Patt, Yehuda ; Primrose, John ; Roh, Mark ; Rougier, Philippe ; Ruers, Theo ; Schmoll, Hans Joachim ; Valls, Carlos ; Vauthey, Nick Jean Nicolas ; Cornelis, Marleen ; Kahan, James P. / OncoSurge : A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2005 ; Vol. 23, No. 28. pp. 7125-7134.
@article{6cab5944fd934a589a76117907e99fd9,
title = "OncoSurge: A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer",
abstract = "Purpose: Most patients with colorectal liver metastases present to general surgeons and oncologists without a specialist interest in their management. Since treatment strategy is frequently dependent on the response to earlier treatments, our aim was to create a therapeutic decision model identifying appropriate procedure sequences. Methods: We used the RAND Corporation/ University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method (RAM) assessing strategies of resection, local ablation and chemotherapy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated appropriateness of each treatment option for a total of 1,872 ratings decisions in 252 cases. A decision model was constructed, consensus measured and results validated using 48 virtual cases, and 34 real cases with known outcomes. Results: Consensus was achieved with overall agreement rates of 93.4 to 99.1{\%}. Absolute resection contraindications included unresectable extrahepatic disease, more than 70{\%} liver involvement, liver failure, and being surgically unfit. Factors not influencing treatment strategy were age, primary tumor stage, timing of metastases detection, past blood transfusion, liver resection type, pre-resection carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and previous hepatectomy. Immediate resection was appropriate with adequate radiologically-defined resection margins and no portal adenopathy; other factors included presence of ≤ 4 or > 4 metastases and unilobar or bilobar involvement. Resection was appropriate postchemotherapy, independent of tumor response in the case of ≤ 4 metastases and unilobar liver involvement. Resection was appropriate only for > 4 metastases or bilobar liver involvement, after tumor shrinkage with chemotherapy. When possible, resection was preferred to local ablation. Conclusion: The results were incorporated into a decision matrix, creating a computer program (OncoSurge). This model identifies individual patient resectability, recommending optimal treatment strategies. It may also be used for medical education.",
author = "Poston, {Graeme J.} and Ren{\'e} Adam and Alberts, {Steven Robert} and Steven Curley and Juan Figueras and Daniel Haller and Francis Kunstlinger and Gilles Mentha and Bernard Nordlinger and Yehuda Patt and John Primrose and Mark Roh and Philippe Rougier and Theo Ruers and Schmoll, {Hans Joachim} and Carlos Valls and Vauthey, {Nick Jean Nicolas} and Marleen Cornelis and Kahan, {James P.}",
year = "2005",
doi = "10.1200/JCO.2005.08.722",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "7125--7134",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "28",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - OncoSurge

T2 - A strategy for improving resectability with curative intent in metastatic colorectal cancer

AU - Poston, Graeme J.

AU - Adam, René

AU - Alberts, Steven Robert

AU - Curley, Steven

AU - Figueras, Juan

AU - Haller, Daniel

AU - Kunstlinger, Francis

AU - Mentha, Gilles

AU - Nordlinger, Bernard

AU - Patt, Yehuda

AU - Primrose, John

AU - Roh, Mark

AU - Rougier, Philippe

AU - Ruers, Theo

AU - Schmoll, Hans Joachim

AU - Valls, Carlos

AU - Vauthey, Nick Jean Nicolas

AU - Cornelis, Marleen

AU - Kahan, James P.

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Purpose: Most patients with colorectal liver metastases present to general surgeons and oncologists without a specialist interest in their management. Since treatment strategy is frequently dependent on the response to earlier treatments, our aim was to create a therapeutic decision model identifying appropriate procedure sequences. Methods: We used the RAND Corporation/ University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method (RAM) assessing strategies of resection, local ablation and chemotherapy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated appropriateness of each treatment option for a total of 1,872 ratings decisions in 252 cases. A decision model was constructed, consensus measured and results validated using 48 virtual cases, and 34 real cases with known outcomes. Results: Consensus was achieved with overall agreement rates of 93.4 to 99.1%. Absolute resection contraindications included unresectable extrahepatic disease, more than 70% liver involvement, liver failure, and being surgically unfit. Factors not influencing treatment strategy were age, primary tumor stage, timing of metastases detection, past blood transfusion, liver resection type, pre-resection carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and previous hepatectomy. Immediate resection was appropriate with adequate radiologically-defined resection margins and no portal adenopathy; other factors included presence of ≤ 4 or > 4 metastases and unilobar or bilobar involvement. Resection was appropriate postchemotherapy, independent of tumor response in the case of ≤ 4 metastases and unilobar liver involvement. Resection was appropriate only for > 4 metastases or bilobar liver involvement, after tumor shrinkage with chemotherapy. When possible, resection was preferred to local ablation. Conclusion: The results were incorporated into a decision matrix, creating a computer program (OncoSurge). This model identifies individual patient resectability, recommending optimal treatment strategies. It may also be used for medical education.

AB - Purpose: Most patients with colorectal liver metastases present to general surgeons and oncologists without a specialist interest in their management. Since treatment strategy is frequently dependent on the response to earlier treatments, our aim was to create a therapeutic decision model identifying appropriate procedure sequences. Methods: We used the RAND Corporation/ University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method (RAM) assessing strategies of resection, local ablation and chemotherapy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated appropriateness of each treatment option for a total of 1,872 ratings decisions in 252 cases. A decision model was constructed, consensus measured and results validated using 48 virtual cases, and 34 real cases with known outcomes. Results: Consensus was achieved with overall agreement rates of 93.4 to 99.1%. Absolute resection contraindications included unresectable extrahepatic disease, more than 70% liver involvement, liver failure, and being surgically unfit. Factors not influencing treatment strategy were age, primary tumor stage, timing of metastases detection, past blood transfusion, liver resection type, pre-resection carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and previous hepatectomy. Immediate resection was appropriate with adequate radiologically-defined resection margins and no portal adenopathy; other factors included presence of ≤ 4 or > 4 metastases and unilobar or bilobar involvement. Resection was appropriate postchemotherapy, independent of tumor response in the case of ≤ 4 metastases and unilobar liver involvement. Resection was appropriate only for > 4 metastases or bilobar liver involvement, after tumor shrinkage with chemotherapy. When possible, resection was preferred to local ablation. Conclusion: The results were incorporated into a decision matrix, creating a computer program (OncoSurge). This model identifies individual patient resectability, recommending optimal treatment strategies. It may also be used for medical education.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27244450852&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=27244450852&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2005.08.722

DO - 10.1200/JCO.2005.08.722

M3 - Article

C2 - 16192596

AN - SCOPUS:27244450852

VL - 23

SP - 7125

EP - 7134

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 28

ER -