Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Colon Cancer Treatment & Management

  • Author: Tomislav Dragovich, MD, PhD; Chief Editor: N Joseph Espat, MD, MS, FACS  more...
 
Updated: May 07, 2016
 

Approach Considerations

Surgery is the only curative modality for localized colon cancer (stage I-III). Surgical resection potentially provides the only curative option for patients with limited metastatic disease in liver and/or lung (stage IV disease), but the proper use of elective colon resections in nonobstructed patients with stage IV disease is a source of continuing debate.

Adjuvant chemotherapy is standard for patients with stage III disease. Its use in stage II disease is controversial, with ongoing studies seeking to confirm which markers might identify patients who would benefit. At present, the role of radiation therapy is limited to palliative therapy for selected metastatic sites such as bone or brain metastases.

Chemotherapy rather than surgery has been the standard management for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Biologic agents have assumed a major role in the treatment of metastatic cases, with selection increasingly guided by genetic analysis of the tumor. The proper use of elective colon/rectal resections in nonobstructed patients with stage IV disease is a source of continuing debate.

For more information, see Colon Cancer Treatment Protocols.

Next

Surgical Care

Surgery is the only curative modality for localized colon cancer (stage I-III) and potentially provides the only curative option for patients with limited metastatic disease in liver and/or lung (stage IV disease). The general principles for all operations include removal of the primary tumor with adequate margins including areas of lymphatic drainage. Standard colectomies for adenocarcinoma of the colon are depicted in the image below.

Standard colectomies for adenocarcinoma of the col Standard colectomies for adenocarcinoma of the colon.

For lesions in the cecum and right colon, a right hemicolectomy is indicated. During a right hemicolectomy, the ileocolic, right colic, and right branch of the middle colic vessels are divided and removed. Care must be taken to identify the right ureter, the ovarian or testicular vessels, and the duodenum. If the omentum is attached to the tumor, it should be removed en bloc with the specimen.

For lesions in the proximal or middle transverse colon, an extended right hemicolectomy can be performed. In this procedure, the ileocolic, right colic, and middle colic vessels are divided and the specimen is removed with its mesentery.

For lesions in the splenic flexure and left colon, a left hemicolectomy is indicated. The left branch of the middle colic vessels, the inferior mesenteric vein, and the left colic vessels along with their mesenteries are included with the specimen.

For sigmoid colon lesions, a sigmoid colectomy is appropriate. The inferior mesenteric artery is divided at its origin, and dissection proceeds toward the pelvis until adequate margins are obtained. Care must be taken during dissection to identify the left ureter and the left ovarian or testicular vessels.

Total abdominal colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis may be required for patients with any of the following:

  • Hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer syndrome (HNPCC)
  • Attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)
  • Metachronous cancers in separate colon segments

Total abdominal colectomy may also be indicated for some patients with acute malignant colon obstructions in whom the status of the proximal bowel is unknown.

Laparoscopic surgery

The advent of laparoscopy has revolutionized the surgical approach to colonic resections for cancers. Large prospective randomized trials have found no significant differences between open and laparoscopic colectomy with regard to intraoperative or postoperative complications, perioperative mortality rates, readmission or reoperation rates, or rate of surgical wound recurrence. Oncologic outcomes (cause-specific survival, disease recurrence, number of lymph nodes harvested) are likewise comparable.[62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67]

For example, the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group trial found no significant differences between laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) or open colectomy in terms of 5-year disease-free survival rate (69% versus 68% in the LAC and open colectomy groups, respectively) or overall survival (76% versus 75%).[63] In a study by Lacy et al with median followup of 95 months, LAC was more effective than open colectomy, although the tendency toward higher cancer-related and overall survival did not reach statistical significance.[66]

Metastatic colorectal cancer

Chemotherapy rather than surgery has been the standard management for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The proper use of elective colon/rectal resections in nonobstructed patients with stage IV disease is a source of continuing debate.

Medical oncologists properly note the major drawbacks to palliative resection, such as loss of performance status and risks of surgical complications that potentially lead to delay in chemotherapy. However, surgeons understand that elective operations have lower morbidity than emergent operations on patients who are receiving chemotherapy.

There is a trend toward nonsurgical management of patients with asymptomatic, surgically incurable colorectal cancer, with studies showing that fewer than 10% of these patients subsequently require surgery for obstruction or perforation.[68, 69] A review by Venderbosch et al found that resection of the primary tumor appears to improve survival in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer, but these researchers concluded that prospective studies are warranted, given the potential bias of those results.[70]

Curative-intent resections of liver metastases have significantly improved long-term survival, with acceptable postoperative morbidity, including in older patients.[71] A study by Brouquet et al found that resection of colorectal liver metastases after a second-line chemotherapy regimen was safe and provided a modest hope for definitive cure, making this approach viable in patients with advanced colorectal liver metastases.[72]

Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of chemotherapeutic agents such as floxuridine (FUDR) is a consideration following partial hepatectomy. A study by House et al found that adjuvant HAI-FUDR combined with modern systemic chemotherapy resulted in improved survival compared with adjuvant chemotherapy alone.[73]

During the past decade, colonic stents have introduced an effective method of palliation for obstruction in patients with unresectable liver metastasis. However, a study by van Hooft et al found that colonic stenting has no decisive clinical advantages compared with emergency surgery. Although it may be used as an alternative treatment in undefined sets of patients, concerns about tumor spread caused by perforations remains.[74]

Previous
Next

Ablation

Although resection is the only potentially curative treatment for patients with colon metastases, other therapeutic options for those who are not surgical candidates include thermal ablation techniques. Cryotherapy uses probes to freeze tumors and surrounding hepatic parenchyma. It requires laparotomy and can potentially results in significant morbidity, including liver cracking, thrombocytopenia, and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC).

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) uses probes that heat liver tumors and the surrounding margin of tissue to create coagulation necrosis. RFA can be performed percutaneously, laparoscopically, or through an open approach. Although RFA has minimal morbidity, local recurrence is a significant problem and correlates with tumor size.

Previous
Next

Adjuvant Therapy

The standard chemotherapy for patients with stage III and some patients with stage II colon cancer for the last two decades consisted of 5-fluorouracil in combination with adjuncts such as levamisole and leucovorin.[2, 3, 4] This approach has been tested in several large randomized trials and has been shown to reduce individual 5-year risk of cancer recurrence and death by about 30%.

In an observational study of 1291 patients with stage III colon cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy reduced the risk of distant recurrence after surgery by about half. Elderly patients benefited to a similar degree as younger patients.[75, 76]

Overall, 56% of the study participants received adjuvant chemotherapy, 31% developed distant metastases, and 37% were 75 years of age or older. In the total population, the use of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a significantly reduced risk of distant recurrence. In separate analyses of patients ≤75 years of age and those ≥75 years of age, the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on recurrence risk was similar in both age groups, with hazard ratios of 0.50 and 0.57, respectively.[75, 76]

Two large randomized trials (MOSAIC and NASBP-C06) investigated the addition of oxaliplatin to fluorouracil (FOLFOX4 and FLOX, respectively) and demonstrated a significant improvement in 3-year disease-free survival for patients with stage III colon cancer. The addition of irinotecan to fluorouracil in the same patient population provided no benefit based on the results from two large randomized trials (CALGB 89803 and PETACC 3).

Another randomized study, XACT, demonstrated noninferiority of capecitabine (Xeloda) compared with fluorouracil/leucovorin as adjuvant therapy for patients with stage III colon cancer. A large trial comparing capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus FOLFOX has completed accrual, but survival data have not yet been reported.

Although information on results of adjuvant therapy in stage II and III colon cancer is limited, analysis of a data set assembled by the Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints group showed that adjuvant chemotherapy provides a significant disease-free survival benefit because it reduces the recurrence rate. The benefit was particularly evident within the first 2 years of adjuvant therapy but some benefit extended to years 3-4.[77]

Adjuvant therapy in stage II colon cancer

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer is controversial. Surgery alone is usually curative for stage II colon cancer, but approximately 20-30% of these patients develop tumor recurrence and ultimately die of metastatic disease. The American Society of Clinical Oncology does not recommend the routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage II colon cancer, and instead recommends encouraging these patients to participate in clinical trials.[78]

A large European trial (QUASAR) demonstrated small but significant benefit (3.6%) in terms of absolute 5-year survival rate for those patients who received fluorouracil/leucovorin versus those in the control group.[54] In contrast, a study by O’Connor et al found that in Medicare patients with stage II colon cancer, with or without poor prognostic features, overall survival was not substantially improved by adjuvant chemotherapy.[79]

Ongoing adjuvant trials are investigating additional risk stratification of stage II colon cancer based on clinicopathological and molecular markers. For example, the ECOG 5202 trial is comparing two forms of adjuvant therapy (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil with or without bevacizumab) in high-risk patients, with low-risk patients undergoing observation only.

In this trial, high-risk patients are defined as those with microsatellite stability (MSS) or low-frequency microsatellite instability (MSI-L) and loss of heterozygosity at 18q. Low-risk patients are those with MSS or MSI-L and retention of 18q, or high-frequency MSI with or without loss of heterozygosity at 18q.

Chemotherapy for Metastatic Disease

Combination regimens provide improved efficacy and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colon cancer. The advent of new classes of active drugs and biologics for colorectal cancer has pushed the expected survival for patients with metastatic disease from 12 months two decades ago to about 22 months currently.

In a phase III multicenter trial in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma refractory to fluorouracil, overall survival did not significantly differ between patients treated with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) (n=246) compared with irinotecan (n=245); however, FOLFOX 4 improved response rate (RR) and time to progression (TTP) compared with irinotecan (P=0.0009 for each RR and TTP). FOLFOX4 was associated with more neutropenia and paresthesias.[80]

Although many patients with colorectal cancer are elderly, exclusion of these patients from randomized controlled trials has impeded the creation of evidence-based guidelines for this population. A study by Seymour et al demonstrated that elderly and frail patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer can participate in a randomized controlled trial. Study patients, who were considered unfit for full-dose chemotherapy, underwent a comprehensive health assessment and were started on chemotherapy at 80% of standard doses.[81]

In September 2015, the FDA approved tipiracil/trifluridine (Lonsurf) for metastatic colorectal cancer. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in the phase III RECOURSE trial, an international, randomized, double-blind study involving 800 patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients had received chemotherapy with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and—for patients with KRAS wild-type tumors—cetuximab or panitumumab. The primary efficacy end point of the study was median overall survival, which was 7.1 months with tipiracil/trifluridine vs 5.3 months with placebo (P <0.001). The secondary end point was progression-free survival, which was 2 months with tipiracil/trifluridine vs 1.7 months with placebo.[82]

Biologic Agents

Biologic agents used in the treatment of colon cancer include monoclonal antibodies against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), as well as a kinase inhibitor and a decoy receptor for VEGF. Such agents include the following:

  • Bevacizumab (Avastin)
  • Cetuximab (Erbitux)
  • Panitumumab (Vectibix)
  • Regorafenib (Stivarga)
  • Ziv-aflibercept (Zaltrap)

Bevacizumab

Bevacizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody to VEGF. It was the first anti-angiogenesis drug to be approved in clinical practice and its first indication was for metastatic colorectal cancer. Approval was based on a pivotal trial that demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when bevacizumab was added to chemotherapy with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL).

Bevacizumab, in combination with fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, is indicated for first- and second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Bevacizumab is also approved for second-line treatment in patients who have progressed on a first-line bevacizumab-containing regimen.

Approval for continuation treatment was based on a study that showed maintenance of VEGF inhibition with bevacizumab plus standard second-line chemotherapy. The risk of death was reduced by 19% for those who received bevacizumab in combination with standard chemotherapy in both the first- and second-line compared with those who received chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio [HR]=0.81, P=0.0057). PFS improved by 32% (HR=0.68, P < 0.0001).[83]

A pooled analysis of cohorts of older patients (aged 65 years or older) from two randomized clinical trials concluded that adding bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer improved OS and PFS in older patients as it does in younger patients, without increased risks of treatment in the older age group. Median OS improved from 14.3 months to 19.3 months with the addition of bevacizumab, while median PFS improved from 6.2 months to 9.2 months.[84]

Results from the randomized CAIRO3 trial appear to show that, compared with observation, maintenance therapy with capecitabine (Xeloda) and bevacizumab significantly delayed disease progression in 558 previously untreated patients with stable (or better) metastatic colorectal cancer after six cycles of induction therapy with capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B).[85, 86] Patients in both groups were treated with CAPOX-B at first progression until second progression.

At a median follow-up of 48 months, CAPOX-B was restarted in 48% of those in the maintenance treatment group and 61% of patients in the observation group.[85, 86] Median second progression after randomization occurred at 11.7 months in the maintenance group and 8.5 months in the observation group, and median first progression after randomization occurred at 8.5 months in the maintenance group compared with 4.1 months in the observation group.[86]

In a study by Tebbutt et al, bevacizumab was found to be associated with a modestly increased risk of arterial thromboembolism (ATE). However, safety was not significantly worse in older patients or those with a history of ATE or other vascular risk factors.[87]

Despite its role in the therapy of metastatic colon cancer, bevacizumab did not significantly prolong disease-free survival in patients with stage II and III colon cancer, when added to adjuvant chemotherapy (mFOLFOX6) in a randomized trial (NASBP C-08).[88]

Cetuximab

Cetuximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody against EGFR that is approved for treatment of KRAS mutation–negative (wild-type), EGFR-expressing, metastatic colorectal cancer. Cetuximab may be used as monotherapy or in combination with irinotecan (Camptosar) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin therapy.[89] Additionally, cetuximab is approved as combination therapy with FOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin).[90, 91]

KRAS mutations, which are present in about 40% of colon adenocarcinomas, affect sensitivity to anti-EGFR treatment.[53] The addition of anti-EGFR antibody treatment to standard chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced colorectal cancer improves progression-free survival for those with wild-type KRAS status, but not those with mutant KRAS.[92]

The CRYSTAL trial, a large international trial exploring the benefit of adding cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy with FOLFIRI, documented that only patients with wild-type KRAS derived clinical benefit from cetuximab. In patients with mutant KRAS, adding cetuximab to chemotherapy provided no clinical benefit and resulted only in unnecessary toxicity.

Based on these results, testing for KRAS mutation was added to the cetuximab indication by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of cetuximab in combination with FOLFIRI for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer, as determined by FDA-approved tests, in July 2012.

Panitumumab

Panitumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against EGFR. This agent was originally approved as monotherapy for patients with EGFR-expressing metastatic colorectal cancer in whom combination chemotherapy with regimens containing fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan had failed or was not tolerated.

In May 2014, the FDA approved panitumumab for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal carcinoma in combination with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4).[93] Approval was based on results from the PRIME trial.[94]

The PRIME trial, a phase III study, showed that patients with wild-type KRAS tumors achieved statistically significant improvement in PFS with panitumumab and FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 alone (9.6 versus 8.0 months, P=0.02) and a nonsignificant improvement in OS versus FOLFOX4 alone (23.9 versus 19.7 months, P =0.07). In contrast, patients with mutant KRAS had significantly reduced PFS with panitumumab-FOLFOX4.[94]

Thus, panitumumab becomes an option, or an alternative to cetuximab, for patients who have tumors with wild-type KRAS.[95, 96] However, Hecht et al reported that adding panitumumab to bevacizumab and chemotherapy (oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based) as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer resulted in increased toxicity and decreased PFS.[97]

In a randomized study of first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, Bokemeyer et al concluded that the overall response rate for cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 was higher than with FOLFOX-4 alone. However, a statistically significant increase was seen only in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, for whom the addition of cetuximab increased chance of response and lowered the risk of disease progression.[98]

Douillard and colleagues reported that in addition to KRAS mutations in exon 2, additional RAS mutations (KRAS exon 3 or 4; NRAS exon 2, 3, or 4; or BRAF exon 15) are associated with inferior PFS and OS with panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment.[99] Other mutations that involve some of the kinases downstream from KRAS (such as BRAF and PI3K) are being investigated and may result in even more selective methods to identify patients that may benefit from EGFR inhibition.

Ramucirumab

The FDA approved ramucirumab for use in combination with FOLFIRI for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that has progressed on a first-line bevacizumab-, oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-containing regimen. The approval was based on the phase III RAISE trial, in which the ramucirumab-FOLFIRI combination improved overall survival and progression-free survival (13.3 months, 5.7 months) compared with placebo-FOLFIRI (11.7 months, 4.5 months) (P = 0.023 and < 0.001, respectively).[100]

Regorafenib

Regorafenib, a kinase inhibitor, was approved in September 2012. It is indicated for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have been previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy; anti-VEGF therapy (eg, bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept); and, if KRAS wild type, anti-EGFR therapy (eg, cetuximab, panitumumab).[101]

Approval was based on a multicenter trial (n=760) that randomized patients at a 2:1 ratio to receive regorafenib in addition to best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care. Statistically significant benefit in OS and PFS was observed for regorafenib over placebo in patients with metastatic colon cancer in whom all approved standard therapies had failed.[102]

Ziv-aflibercept

Ziv-aflibercept is a fusion protein that acts as a decoy receptor for VEGF-A, VEGF-B, and placental growth factor (PlGF). This agent was approved for use in combination with FOLFIRI for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that is resistant to or has progressed after an oxaliplatin-containing fluoropyrimidine-based regimen.[103]

A phase III trial by Van Cutsem and colleagues in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen found that the addition of ziv-aflibercept fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) improves survival. Median survival time was 13.5 months with ziv-aflibercept plus FOLFIRI versus 12.06 months with FOLFIRI alone (P = O.0032); PFS was 6.90 versus 4.67 months, respectively (P < 0.0001).[104]

Radiation Therapy

Although radiation therapy remains a standard modality for patients with rectal cancer, it has only a limited role in colon cancer. Radiation therapy is not used in the adjuvant setting, and in metastatic settings it is used only for palliative therapy in selected metastatic sites such as bone or brain metastases.

Newer, more selective ways of administering radiation therapy, such as stereotactic radiotherapy (CyberKnife) and tomotherapy, are currently being investigated. In the future, these techniques may extend the indications for radiotherapy in the management of colon cancer.

A prospective, multicenter, randomized phase III study by Hendlisz et al showed that the addition of radioembolization with yttrium-90 significantly improved time to liver progression and median time to tumor progression in patients with unresectable, chemotherapy-refractory, liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer. The study compared treatment with fluorouracil alone with fluorouracil plus yttrium-90 resin, which was injected into the hepatic artery.[105]  The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved yttrium-90 resin microspheres (SIR-Spheres) for the treatment of unresectable metastatic liver tumors from primary colorectal cancer in combination with adjuvant intra-hepatic artery chemotherapy with floxuridine.

HER2-positive disease

In a phase 2 proof-of-concept study, 27 heavily pretreated patients with HER2-positive metastatic colon cancer showed good response to a therapy regimen that is commonly used to treat HER2-positive breast cancer and does not include a chemotherapy backbone. The 27 patients in the study were identified through screening of 914 patients with KRAS exon 2 (codons 12 & 13) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.[106, 107]

Most of the patients had extensive metastatic disease and distal colon tumors. Almost 75% had received at least four prior treatment regimens and had spent a median total time of 20 months on previous treatments.

Patients were treated with a combination of trastuzumab and lapatinib. At 1 year, 12 of the 27 patients (45%) were still alive. At a median follow-up of 94 weeks, one patient (4%) had achieved a complete response, seven (26%) had achieved a partial response, and disease had stabilized in 12 patients (44%).[106, 107]

Previous
Next

Consultations

Colorectal cancer, especially early stage disease, can be cured surgically. Following diagnosis and staging, obtaining surgical consultation for the possibility of resection may be appropriate. After surgery, the stage of the tumor may be advanced depending on the operative findings (eg, lymph node involvement, palpable liver masses, peritoneal spread).

In the care of patients with colorectal cancer and isolated liver metastases, consider surgical consultation for possible resection. In some cases, resection of previously unresectable liver metastases may become feasible after cytoreduction with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, ongoing involvement of the surgical oncologist is very important in patient care, even if the tumor is not considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. In patients with advanced disease, palliative surgery may be helpful in cases of bleeding or obstruction.

Gastroenterology (GI) consultation is critical for screening of high-risk individuals (ie, patients with a family history of colorectal cancer or polyposis syndromes) and those individuals who are found to be inappropriately iron deficient or to have occult blood on screening fecal examination. A colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy is necessary to visualize the colon endoscopically, to obtain biopsies, or to resect polyps.

GI consultation may also be necessary in the management of advanced disease. The advent of colorectal stents allows a nonsurgical management of impending obstruction in patients who present with unresectable, metastatic disease.

GI consultation is necessary in the follow-up of patients after surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients must be screened for recurrent disease in the colon by colonoscopic examination at 1 year after surgery and then every 3 years.

Previous
Next

Long-Term Monitoring

Pooled analysis from several large adjuvant trials showed that 85% of colon cancer recurrences occur within 3 years after resection of primary tumor, with 95% occurring within 5 years. Therefore, patients with resected colon cancer (stage II and III) should undergo regular surveillance for at least 5 years following resection.[108] Recommendations for post-treatment surveillance, from the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO),[109] the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO),[108] and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)[110] are compared in Table 2, below.

Table 2. Surveillance recommendations for stage II and III colon cancer (Open Table in a new window)

Parameter Organization
ESMO [JSMO](2013) ASCO (2013) NCCN (2016)
History and physical exam Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 -12 mo at 4 and 5 y Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y Every 3-6 mo for 2 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y
CEA Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 -12 mo at 4 and 5 y Every 3 mo for 3 y* Every 3-6 mo for 2 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y
Chest CT* Every 6-12 mo for first 3 y Every 1 y for 3 y Every 1 y for 5 y
Colonoscopy** At y 1 after surgery, and every 3-5 y thereafter At 1 y, then every 5 y, dictated by the findings on the previous colonoscopy At 1 y, 3 y, then every 5 y if negative
Abdominal CT* Every 6-12 mo for first 3 y Every 1 y for 3 y Every 6-12 mo for up to 5 y; scans to include chest and pelvis
ESMO = European Society of Medical Oncology; JSMO = Japanese Society of Medical Oncology; ASCO = American Society of Clinical Oncology; NCCN = National Comprehensive Cancer Network; CEA = carcinoembryonic antigen; CT = computed tomography



* For patients at high risk for recurrence (eg, lymphatic or venous invasion, or poorly differentiated tumors).



**Colonoscopy should be performed 3-6 mo postoperatively if preoperative colonoscopy was not done, due to an obstructing lesion; otherwise, colonoscopy in 1 y; if abnormal, repeat in 1 year; if no advanced adenoma (ie, villous polyp, polyp > 1 cm, or high-grade dysplasia), repeat in 3 y, then every 5 y.



Followup should be guided by the patient’s presumed risk of recurrence and functional status. Testing at the more frequent end of the range should be considered for patients at high risk. Patients with severe comorbid conditions that make them ineligible for surgery or systemic therapy should not undergo surveillance testing.[108]

Cancer Care Ontario published guidelines for the follow-up care of survivors of stages II and III colorectal cancer, and these were endorsed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology. The recommendations include the following[111, 108] :

  • Surveillance is especially important in the initial 2-4 years following treatment, when most recurrences occur
  • Patients should be followed for 5 years, and regular reviews of medical history, physical examination, and carcinoembryonic antigen testing should be performed every 3-6 months
  • Annual computed tomography (CT) scanning of the abdomen and chest should be performed for 3 years
  • Pelvic CT scanning should be performed in patients with rectal cancer annually for 3-5 years
  • In patients who have not received pelvic radiation, a rectosigmoidoscopy should be performed every 6 months for 2-5 years
  • A surveillance colonoscopy should be performed approximately 1 year after initial surgery
  • Patients should be counseled to maintain a healthy body weight, be physically active, and follow a healthy diet
Previous
Next

Prevention

Colorectal cancer prevention strategies fall into three categories:

  • Screening (see Workup)
  • Lifestyle measures
  • Pharmacologic prevention

Lifestyle measures

Abundant epidemiologic literature suggests an association of risk for developing colorectal cancer with dietary habits, environmental exposures, and level of physical activity. For example, a prospective cohort study in the general population of two Danish cities concluded that if all participants had followed recommendations for five lifestyle factors (physical activity, waist circumference, smoking, alcohol intake, and diet), 23% of colorectal cancer cases might have been prevented.[112]

There is also evidence that diet and physical activity affect the risk for recurrence of colon cancer. A prospective observational study involving patients with stage III colon cancer from the CALGB 89803 adjuvant chemotherapy trial demonstrated adverse effect with regards to risk for recurrence and increased mortality for patients following a "Western" diet (high intake of red meat, refined grains, fat, and sweets) versus a "prudent" diet (high intake of fruits and vegetables, poultry, and fish).[10]

In another observational study from the same cohort of patients, patients were prospectively monitored and physical activity was recorded. The study concluded that physical activity reduces the risk of recurrence and mortality in patients with resected stage III colon cancer.[113]

Morikawa et al reported that in patients with colorectal cancer that tested negative for cadherin-associated protein β 1 (CTNNB1 or β-catenin), high physical activity (≥18 metabolic equivalent task [MET] hours/week) after diagnosis was associated with significantly better cancer-specific survival. No association between physical activity and survival was seen in CTNNB1–positive cases.[114]

In a study by Campbell et al, recreational physical activity before and after colorectal cancer diagnosis was associated with lower mortality. These researchers determined that 6 hours or more of sitting per day was associated with an increase in mortality compared with sitting 3 hours or less per day. The findings suggest that increasing physical activity helps reduce mortality in patients with colorectal cancer.[27]

Pharmacologic prevention

Pharmacologic prevention is based on the understanding of colorectal carcinogenesis and the availability of pharmacologic agents that are effective yet minimally toxic. The efficacy of these agents is usually first tested in high-risk populations.

Celecoxib (Celebrex), a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, was first tested in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Celecoxib was effective in decreasing the number and size of polyps on serial colonoscopies, which was the primary surrogate endpoint for this trial.[115] The drug was approved for FAP patients, although it remains to be seen whether this intervention translates to reduced cancer incidence and prolonged survival.

Enthusiasm for cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors as chemopreventive agents has dampened because of a high incidence of cardiovascular toxicity in trial patients, which led to the removal of rofecoxib from the market. Other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), such as sulindac and nonselective cyclooxygenase inhibitors, have been tested in lower-risk populations.

Aspirin use has been shown to be effective in both primary prevention of colorectal cancer (at doses of 300 mg or more daily for about 5 years[116] ) and secondary prevention (at doses ranging from 81 to 325 mg daily[117] ) of colorectal adenomas. The decrease in colon cancer risk with aspirin use may vary among population subgroups. However, body mass index, physical activity, and plasma C-peptide levels were shown to not have a significant impact on aspirin’s effect on colon cancer risk.[118]

Examination of questionnaire data collected from the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study showed regular aspirin use was associated with lower risk of BRAF –wild-type colorectal cancer (multivariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.73) but not with BRAF -mutated cancer risk (multivariable HR, 1.03). Status of tumor PTGS2 expression or PIK3CA or KRAS mutation had no effect on this association.[119]

A 2013 study showed that low-dose aspirin taken every other day lowers the risk for colorectal cancer in middle-aged women. Nearly 40,000 women aged 45 and older were randomized to low-dose aspirin (100 mg) or placebo every other day for roughly 10 years; 84% were followed for an additional 7 years after treatment ended. At followup, colorectal cancer risk was lower in the aspirin group, mostly owing to a reduction in proximal colon cancer; this reduction in risk emerged after 10 years.[120]

Some trials focused on combined inhibition of polyamine production and cyclooxygenase inhibition. A report from a large randomized trial of a combination of sulindac and dimethylformamine (DMFO), an inhibitor of ornithine decarboxylase (ODC), described a dramatic effect of this combination in reducing polyp recurrence in patients with prior history of colon polyps. Confirmatory trials are ongoing.[121]

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Tomislav Dragovich, MD, PhD Chief, Section of Hematology and Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center

Tomislav Dragovich, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, SWOG, American Society of Clinical Oncology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Vassiliki L Tsikitis, MD Associate Professor of Surgery, Department of Surgery, Division of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University School of Medicine

Vassiliki L Tsikitis, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Association for Academic Surgery, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, SWOG, Association of Women Surgeons, Pacific Coast Surgical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Chief Editor

N Joseph Espat, MD, MS, FACS Harold J Wanebo Professor of Surgery, Assistant Dean of Clinical Affairs, Boston University School of Medicine; Chairman, Department of Surgery, Director, Adele R Decof Cancer Center, Roger Williams Medical Center

N Joseph Espat, MD, MS, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Association for Cancer Research, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, Association for Academic Surgery, Central Surgical Association, Chicago Medical Society, International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, Pancreas Club, Sigma Xi, Society for Leukocyte Biology, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, Society of Surgical Oncology, Society of University Surgeons, Southeastern Surgical Congress, Southern Medical Association, Surgical Infection Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Philip Schulman, MD Chief, Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Philip Schulman, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, American College of Physicians, American Society of Hematology, Medical Society of the State of New York

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board. Colon Cancer Treatment–Health Professional Version. National Cancer Institute. Available at http://www.cancer.gov/types/colorectal/hp/colon-treatment-pdq. January 29, 2016; Accessed: April 14, 2016.

  2. Goldberg RM, Sargent DJ, Morton RF, et al. A randomized controlled trial of fluorouracil plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin combinations in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jan 1. 22(1):23-30. [Medline].

  3. Haller DG, Catalano PJ, Macdonald JS, O'Rourke MA, Frontiera MS, Jackson DV. Phase III study of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and levamisole in high-risk stage II and III colon cancer: final report of Intergroup 0089. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Dec 1. 23(34):8671-8. [Medline].

  4. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004 Jun 3. 350(23):2335-42. [Medline].

  5. [Guideline] Desch CE, Benson AB 3rd, Somerfield MR, et al. Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Nov 20. 23(33):8512-9. [Medline].

  6. Sanoff HK, Sargent DJ, Campbell ME, et al. Five-year data and prognostic factor analysis of oxaliplatin and irinotecan combinations for advanced colorectal cancer: N9741. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Dec 10. 26(35):5721-7. [Medline].

  7. Chu, E and DeVita VT. Physicians’ cancer chemotherapy drug manual. Jones and Bartlett publishers. 2008.

  8. Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Hamilton SR, Kern SE, Preisinger AC, Leppert M, et al. Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N Engl J Med. 1988 Sep 1. 319(9):525-32. [Medline].

  9. Burn J, Bishop DT, Mecklin JP, Macrae F, et al. Effect of aspirin or resistant starch on colorectal neoplasia in the Lynch syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2008 Dec 11. 359(24):2567-78. [Medline].

  10. Meyerhardt JA, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, et al. Association of dietary patterns with cancer recurrence and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. JAMA. 2007 Aug 15. 298(7):754-64. [Medline].

  11. Aune D, Chan DS, Lau R, et al. Dietary fibre, whole grains, and risk of colorectal cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ. 2011 Nov 10. 343:d6617. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  12. Pala V, Sieri S, Berrino F, et al. Yogurt consumption and risk of colorectal cancer in the Italian European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition cohort. Int J Cancer. 2011 Dec 1. 129(11):2712-9. [Medline].

  13. Tsoi KK, Pau CY, Wu WK, Chan FK, Griffiths S, Sung JJ. Cigarette smoking and the risk of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jun. 7(6):682-688.e1-5. [Medline].

  14. Cho E, Lee JE, Rimm EB, Fuchs CS, Giovannucci EL. Alcohol consumption and the risk of colon cancer by family history of colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Feb. 95(2):413-9. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  15. Yuhara H, Steinmaus C, Cohen SE, Corley DA, Tei Y, Buffler PA. Is diabetes mellitus an independent risk factor for colon cancer and rectal cancer?. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Nov. 106(11):1911-21; quiz 1922. [Medline].

  16. Jacobs ET, Ahnen DJ, Ashbeck EL, Baron JA, Greenberg ER, Lance P, et al. Association between body mass index and colorectal neoplasia at follow-up colonoscopy: a pooling study. Am J Epidemiol. 2009 Mar 15. 169(6):657-66. [Medline].

  17. Morikawa T, Kuchiba A, Lochhead P, et al. Prospective Analysis of Body Mass Index, Physical Activity, and Colorectal Cancer Risk Associated with ß-Catenin (CTNNB1) Status. Cancer Res. 2013 Mar 1. 73(5):1600-10. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  18. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Jan-Feb. 64(1):9-29. [Medline].

  19. World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Colorectal Cancer: Estimated Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Available at http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

  20. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Colon and Rectum Cancer. National Cancer Institute. Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/colorect.html. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

  21. Chua TC, Saxena A, Chu F, Zhao J, Morris DL. Predictors of cure after hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastases: an analysis of actual 5- and 10-year survivors. J Surg Oncol. 2011 Jun. 103(8):796-800. [Medline].

  22. Fong Y, Fortner J, Sun RL, Brennan MF, Blumgart LH. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 1999 Sep. 230(3):309-18; discussion 318-21. [Medline].

  23. Aggarwal C, Meropol NJ, Punt CJ, Iannotti N, Saidman BH, Sabbath KD, et al. Relationship among circulating tumor cells, CEA and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012 Oct 1. [Medline].

  24. Katz SC, Bamboat ZM, Maker AV, Shia J, Pillarisetty VG, Yopp AC, et al. Regulatory T Cell Infiltration Predicts Outcome Following Resection of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Sep 26. [Medline].

  25. Yothers G, Sargent DJ, Wolmark N, et al. Outcomes Among Black Patients With Stage II and III Colon Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy: An Analysis of ACCENT Adjuvant Trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Oct 19. 103(20):1498-1506. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  26. Campbell PT, Newton CC, Dehal AN, et al. Impact of body mass index on survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis: the Cancer Prevention Study-II Nutrition Cohort. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1. 30(1):42-52. [Medline].

  27. Campbell PT, Patel AV, Newton CC, Jacobs EJ, Gapstur SM. Associations of recreational physical activity and leisure time spent sitting with colorectal cancer survival. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Mar 1. 31(7):876-85. [Medline].

  28. Rothwell PM, Fowkes GR, Belch JF, Ogawa H, Warlow CP, Meade TW. Effect of daily aspirin on long-term risk of death due to cancer: analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials. Lancet. Dec 7/2010; Early online publication. [Full Text].

  29. Burn J, Gerdes AM, Macrae F, et al. Long-term effect of aspirin on cancer risk in carriers of hereditary colorectal cancer: an analysis from the CAPP2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011 Dec 17. 378(9809):2081-7. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  30. Baillargeon J, Kuo YF, Lin YL, et al. Effect of mental disorders on diagnosis, treatment, and survival of older adults with colon cancer. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Jul. 59(7):1268-73. [Medline].

  31. Phipps AI, Baron J, Newcomb PA. Prediagnostic smoking history, alcohol consumption, and colorectal cancer survival: The Seattle Colon Cancer Family Registry. Cancer. 2011 Nov 1. 117(21):4948-57. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  32. Dehal AN, Newton CC, Jacobs EJ, et al. Impact of diabetes mellitus and insulin use on survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis: the Cancer Prevention Study-II Nutrition Cohort. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1. 30(1):53-9. [Medline].

  33. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2016. American Cancer Society. Available at http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/document/acspc-047079.pdf. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

  34. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009 [corrected]. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Mar. 104(3):739-50. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  35. Mulcahy N. Test all colorectal cancers for Lynch syndrome. NCCN: Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/821981. Accessed: March 14, 2014.

  36. Umar A, Boland CR, Terdiman JP, Syngal S, de la Chapelle A, Rüschoff J, et al. Revised Bethesda Guidelines for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) and microsatellite instability. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 Feb 18. 96(4):261-8. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  37. Thirunavukarasu P, Sukumar S, Sathaiah M, Mahan M, Pragatheeshwar KD, Pingpank JF, et al. C-stage in Colon Cancer: Implications of Carcinoembryonic Antigen Biomarker in Staging, Prognosis, and Management. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Apr 20. 103(8):689-97. [Medline].

  38. Littlejohn C, Hilton S, Macfarlane GJ, Phull P. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence for flexible sigmoidoscopy as a screening method for the prevention of colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2012 Sep 21. [Medline].

  39. Wilschut JA, Habbema JD, van Leerdam ME, et al. Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Dec 7. 103(23):1741-51. [Medline].

  40. Jensen CD, Corley DA, Quinn VP, Doubeni CA, Zauber AG, Lee JK, et al. Fecal Immunochemical Test Program Performance Over 4 Rounds of Annual Screening: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Jan 26. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  41. Douglas D. Clopidogrel Boosts Bleeding Risk After Polypectomy. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/782323. Accessed: April 24, 2013.

  42. Gandhi S, Narula N, Mosleh W, Marshall JK, Farkouh M. Meta-analysis: colonoscopic post-polypectomy bleeding in patients on continued clopidogrel therapy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013 May. 37(10):947-52. [Medline].

  43. Nelson R. FDA Approves Cologuard for Colorectal Cancer Screening. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/829757. Accessed: August 16, 2014.

  44. Brooks M. FDA Clears First Blood-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Test. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/861942?nlid=103743_3901&src=wnl_newsalrt_160414_MSCPEDIT&uac=72886PK&impID=1061400&faf=1. April 14, 2016; Accessed: April 14, 2016.

  45. [Guideline] Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008 May-Jun. 58(3):130-60. [Medline].

  46. Lasser KE, Murillo J, Lisboa S, et al. Colorectal cancer screening among ethnically diverse, low-income patients: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2011 May 23. 171(10):906-12. [Medline].

  47. Spada C, De Vincentis F, Cesaro P, Hassan C, Riccioni ME, Minelli Grazioli L, et al. Accuracy and safety of second-generation PillCam COLON capsule for colorectal polyp detection. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2012 May. 5(3):173-8. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  48. Lieberman DA, Rex DK, Winawer SJ, Giardiello FM, Johnson DA, Levin TR. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012 Sep. 143(3):844-57. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  49. [Guideline] American Society for Clinical Pathology, the College of American Pathologists, the Association for Molecular Pathology, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Guideline on the Evaluation of Molecular Markersfor Colorectal Cancer Expert Panel Draft Recommendations Summary for Open Comment Period. Available at http://www.amp.org/committees/clinical_practice/documents/20150327CRCMMDraftRecommendationsforOCP-UPDATEDfinaldraft_001.pdf. Accessed: May 13, 2015.

  50. Nelson R. New guidelines on colorectal cancer molecular testing. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/842496. Accessed: May 13, 2015.

  51. Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. Cancer staging manual. 6th ed. New York: Springer; 2002.

  52. Ogino S, Kawasaki T, Kirkner GJ, Ohnishi M, Fuchs CS. 18q loss of heterozygosity in microsatellite stable colorectal cancer is correlated with CpG island methylator phenotype-negative (CIMP-0) and inversely with CIMP-low and CIMP-high. BMC Cancer. 2007 May 2. 7:72. [Medline].

  53. Jimeno A, Messersmith WA, Hirsch FR, Franklin WA, Eckhardt SG. KRAS Mutations and Sensitivity to Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Colorectal Cancer: Practical Application of Patient Selection. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 5. [Medline].

  54. Quasar Collaborative Group, Gray R, Barnwell J, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy versus observation in patients with colorectal cancer: a randomised study. Lancet. 2007 Dec 15. 370(9604):2020-9. [Medline].

  55. Saltz LB, Kelsen DP. Adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer. Annu Rev Med. 1997. 48:191-202. [Medline].

  56. Ribic CM, Sargent DJ, Moore MJ, et al. Tumor microsatellite-instability status as a predictor of benefit from fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 Jul 17. 349(3):247-57. [Medline].

  57. Mlecnik B, Tosolini M, Kirilovsky A, Berger A, Bindea G, Meatchi T, et al. Histopathologic-based prognostic factors of colorectal cancers are associated with the state of the local immune reaction. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Feb 20. 29(6):610-8. [Medline].

  58. Le Voyer TE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL, et al. Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup trial INT-0089. J Clin Oncol. 2003 Aug 1. 21(15):2912-9. [Medline].

  59. Gunderson LL, Jessup JM, Sargent DJ, Greene FL, Stewart AK. Revised TN categorization for colon cancer based on national survival outcomes data. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jan 10. 28(2):264-71. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  60. Hugen N, van de Velde CJ, de Wilt JH, Nagtegaal ID. Metastatic pattern in colorectal cancer is strongly influenced by histological subtype. Ann Oncol. 2014 Mar. 25(3):651-7. [Medline].

  61. Boggs W. Histology influences colorectal cancer metastatic pattern. Reuters Health Information. March 11, 2014. [Full Text].

  62. Boller AM, Nelson H. Colon and rectal cancer: laparoscopic or open?. Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Nov 15. 13(22 Pt 2):6894s-6s. [Medline].

  63. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg. 2007 Oct. 246(4):655-62; discussion 662-4. [Medline].

  64. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, et al. Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20. 25(21):3061-8. [Medline].

  65. Kuhry E, Schwenk WF, Gaupset R, Romild U, Bonjer HJ. Long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16. CD003432. [Medline].

  66. Lacy AM, Delgado S, Castells A, et al. The long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopy-assisted versus open surgery for colon cancer. Ann Surg. 2008 Jul. 248(1):1-7. [Medline].

  67. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, et al. Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2005 Jul. 6(7):477-84. [Medline].

  68. Poultsides GA, Servais EL, Saltz LB, Patil S, Kemeny NE, Guillem JG. Outcome of Primary Tumor in Patients With Synchronous Stage IV Colorectal Cancer Receiving Combination Chemotherapy Without Surgery As Initial Treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jun 1. [Medline].

  69. Nitzkorski JR, Farma JM, Watson JC, Siripurapu V, Zhu F, Matteotti RS, et al. Outcome and natural history of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer receiving chemotherapy without primary tumor resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Feb. 19(2):379-83. [Medline].

  70. Venderbosch S, de Wilt JH, Teerenstra S, et al. Prognostic value of resection of primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer: retrospective analysis of two randomized studies and a review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Nov. 18(12):3252-60. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  71. Di Benedetto F, Berretta M, D'Amico G, et al. Liver resection for colorectal metastases in older adults: a paired matched analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Dec. 59(12):2282-90. [Medline].

  72. Brouquet A, Overman MJ, Kopetz S, et al. Is resection of colorectal liver metastases after a second-line chemotherapy regimen justified?. Cancer. 2011 Oct 1. 117(19):4484-92. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  73. House MG, Kemeny NE, Gonen M, et al. Comparison of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy with or without hepatic arterial infusional chemotherapy after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2011 Dec. 254(6):851-6. [Medline].

  74. van Hooft JE, Bemelman WA, Oldenburg B, et al. Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Apr. 12(4):344-52. [Medline].

  75. Saunders R. Adjuvant Chemo May Benefit Elderly Colon Cancer Patients. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/810189. Accessed: September 13, 2013.

  76. van Erning FN, Creemers GJ, De Hingh IH, Loosveld OJ, Goey SH, Lemmens VE. Reduced risk of distant recurrence after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer aged 75 years or older. Ann Oncol. 2013 Aug 8. [Medline].

  77. Sargent D, Sobrero A, Grothey A, O'Connell MJ, Buyse M, Andre T, et al. Evidence for cure by adjuvant therapy in colon cancer: observations based on individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 20. 27(6):872-7. [Medline].

  78. Benson AB 3rd, Schrag D, Somerfield MR, Cohen AM, Figueredo AT, Flynn PJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations on adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Aug 15. 22(16):3408-19. [Medline].

  79. O'Connor ES, Greenblatt DY, LoConte NK, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer with poor prognostic features. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Sep 1. 29(25):3381-8. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  80. Kim GP, Sargent DJ, Mahoney MR, Rowland KM Jr, Philip PA, Mitchell E, et al. Phase III noninferiority trial comparing irinotecan with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma previously treated with fluorouracil: N9841. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jun 10. 27(17):2848-54. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  81. Seymour MT, Thompson LC, Wasan HS, et al. Chemotherapy options in elderly and frail patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MRC FOCUS2): an open-label, randomised factorial trial. Lancet. 2011 May 21. 377(9779):1749-59. [Medline].

  82. Mayer RJ, Van Cutsem E, Falcone A, Yoshino T, Garcia-Carbonero R, Mizunuma N, et al. Randomized trial of TAS-102 for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015 May 14. 372 (20):1909-19. [Medline].

  83. Bennouna J, Sastre J, Arnold D, Osterlund P, Greil R, Van Cutsem E, et al. Continuation of bevacizumab after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (ML18147): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jan. 14(1):29-37. [Medline].

  84. Kabbinavar FF, Hurwitz HI, Yi J, Sarkar S, Rosen O. Addition of bevacizumab to fluorouracil-based first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of cohorts of older patients from two randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 10. 27(2):199-205. [Medline].

  85. Koopman M, Simkens L, May A, Mol L, van Tinteren H, Punt CJA, et al. Final results and subgroup analyses of the phase 3 CAIRO3 study: Maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab versus observation after induction treatment with chemotherapy and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). (abstract LBA388). Presented at: 2014 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium (GICS); January 18, 2014; San Francisco, Calif. J Clin Oncol. 2014. 32 (suppl 3):abstr LBA388. [Full Text].

  86. Nelson R. Maintenance chemo delays progression in metastatic CRC. Medscape Medical News. January 27, 2014. [Full Text].

  87. Tebbutt NC, Murphy F, Zannino D, et al. Risk of arterial thromboembolic events in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab. Ann Oncol. 2011 Aug. 22(8):1834-8. [Medline].

  88. Allegra CJ, Yothers G, O'Connell MJ, Sharif S, Petrelli NJ, Colangelo LH, et al. Phase III trial assessing bevacizumab in stages II and III carcinoma of the colon: results of NSABP protocol C-08. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Jan 1. 29(1):11-6. [Medline].

  89. Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004 Jul 22. 351(4):337-45. [Medline].

  90. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Láng I, Folprecht G, Nowacki MP, Cascinu S, et al. Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 20. 29(15):2011-9. [Medline].

  91. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Hitre E, Zaluski J, Chang Chien CR, Makhson A, et al. Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 2. 360(14):1408-17. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  92. Lin AY, Buckley NS, Lu AT, et al. Effect of KRAS mutational status in advanced colorectal cancer on the outcomes of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2011 Mar 1. 10(1):63-9. [Medline].

  93. Chustecka Z. FDA Approves Panitumumab for Use With FOLFOX in mCRC. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/825699. Accessed: June 2, 2014.

  94. Douillard JY, Siena S, Cassidy J, Tabernero J, Burkes R, Barugel M, et al. Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: the PRIME study. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 1. 28(31):4697-705. [Medline].

  95. Peeters M, Price TJ, Cervantes A, Sobrero AF, Ducreux M, Hotko Y, et al. Randomized phase III study of panitumumab with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) compared with FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 1. 28(31):4706-13. [Medline].

  96. Price TJ, Peeters M, Kim TW, Li J, Cascinu S, Ruff P, et al. Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2014 May. 15(6):569-79. [Medline].

  97. Hecht JR, Mitchell E, Chidiac T, Scroggin C, Hagenstad C, Spigel D, et al. A randomized phase IIIB trial of chemotherapy, bevacizumab, and panitumumab compared with chemotherapy and bevacizumab alone for metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10. 27(5):672-80. [Medline].

  98. Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Makhson A, Hartmann JT, Aparicio J, de Braud F, et al. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10. 27(5):663-71. [Medline].

  99. Douillard JY, Oliner KS, Siena S, Tabernero J, Burkes R, Barugel M, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 12. 369(11):1023-34. [Medline].

  100. Tabernero J, Yoshino T, Cohn AL, Obermannova R, Bodoky G, Garcia-Carbonero R, et al. Ramucirumab versus placebo in combination with second-line FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma that progressed during or after first-line therapy with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and a fluoropyrimidine (RAISE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015 Apr 10. [Medline].

  101. Stivarga (regorafenib) [package insert]. Wayne, NJ: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. September 2012. Available at [Full Text].

  102. Grothey A, Sobrero AF, Salvatore S, Falcone A, Ychou M, Heinz-Josef L, et al. Results of a phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial (CORRECT) of regorafenib plus best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo plus BSC in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who have progressed after standard therapies. J Clin Oncol 30, 2012 (suppl 4; abstr LBA385). [Full Text].

  103. Patel A, Sun W. Ziv-aflibercept in metastatic colorectal cancer. Biologics. 2014. 8:13-25. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  104. Van Cutsem E, Tabernero J, Lakomy R, Prenen H, Prausová J, Macarulla T, et al. Addition of aflibercept to fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan improves survival in a phase III randomized trial in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with an oxaliplatin-based regimen. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Oct 1. 30(28):3499-506. [Medline].

  105. Hendlisz A, Van den Eynde M, Peeters M, Maleux G, Lambert B, Vannoote J, et al. Phase III trial comparing protracted intravenous fluorouracil infusion alone or with yttrium-90 resin microspheres radioembolization for liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug 10. 28(23):3687-94. [Medline].

  106. Harrison P. HER2 Therapy in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: 'Extraordinary'. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/862774?nlid=104521_2203&src=WNL_mdplsnews_160506_mscpedit_honc&uac=72886PK&spon=7&impID=1087286&faf=1. May 3, 2016; Accessed: May 7, 2016.

  107. Sartore-Bianchi A, Trusolino L, Martino C, Bencardino K, Lonardi S, et al. Dual-targeted therapy with trastuzumab and lapatinib in treatment-refractory, KRAS codon 12/13 wild-type, HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer (HERACLES): a proof-of-concept, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016 Apr 20. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  108. [Guideline] Meyerhardt JA, Mangu PB, Flynn PJ, Korde L, Loprinzi CL, Minsky BD, et al. Follow-Up Care, Surveillance Protocol, and Secondary Prevention Measures for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Nov 12. [Medline].

  109. [Guideline] Labianca R, Nordlinger B, Beretta GD, Mosconi S, Mandalà M, Cervantes A, et al. Early colon cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2013 Oct. 24 Suppl 6:vi64-72. [Medline].

  110. [Guideline] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon Cancer Version 2.2016. Available at http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#site. Accessed: April 14, 2016.

  111. Chustecka Z. Guidelines for Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer Patients. Medscape Medical News. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/814359. Accessed: November 18, 2013.

  112. Kirkegaard H, Johnsen NF, Christensen J, Frederiksen K, Overvad K, Tjonneland A. Association of adherence to lifestyle recommendations and risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective Danish cohort study. BMJ. 2010 Oct 26. 341:c5504. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  113. Meyerhardt JA, Heseltine D, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, Saltz LB, Mayer RJ, et al. Impact of physical activity on cancer recurrence and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer: findings from CALGB 89803. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 1. 24(22):3535-41. [Medline].

  114. Morikawa T, Kuchiba A, Yamauchi M, et al. Association of CTNNB1 (beta-catenin) alterations, body mass index, and physical activity with survival in patients with colorectal cancer. JAMA. 2011 Apr 27. 305(16):1685-94. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  115. Arber N, Spicak J, Rácz I, Zavoral M, Breazna A, Gerletti P, et al. Five-year analysis of the prevention of colorectal sporadic adenomatous polyps trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Jun. 106(6):1135-46. [Medline].

  116. Flossmann E, Rothwell PM. Effect of aspirin on long-term risk of colorectal cancer: consistent evidence from randomised and observational studies. Lancet. 2007 May 12. 369(9573):1603-13. [Medline].

  117. Cole BF, Logan RF, Halabi S, Benamouzig R, Sandler RS, Grainge MJ, et al. Aspirin for the chemoprevention of colorectal adenomas: meta-analysis of the randomized trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Feb 18. 101(4):256-66. [Medline].

  118. Zhang X, Smith-Warner SA, Chan AT, et al. Aspirin Use, Body Mass Index, Physical Activity, Plasma C-Peptide, and Colon Cancer Risk in US Health Professionals. Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Aug 15. 174(4):459-67. [Medline].

  119. Nishihara R, Lochhead P, Kuchiba A, Jung S, Yamauchi M, Liao X, et al. Aspirin use and risk of colorectal cancer according to BRAF mutation status. JAMA. 2013 Jun 26. 309(24):2563-71. [Medline].

  120. Cook NR, Lee IM, Zhang SM, Moorthy MV, Buring JE. Alternate-Day, Low-Dose Aspirin and Cancer Risk: Long-Term Observational Follow-up of a Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013 Jul 16. 159(2):77-85. [Medline].

  121. Meyskens FL Jr, McLaren CE, Pelot D, Fujikawa-Brooks S, Carpenter PM, Hawk E, et al. Difluoromethylornithine plus sulindac for the prevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas: a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Cancer Prev Res (Phila Pa). 2008 Jun. 1(1):32-8. [Medline].

  122. Tournigand C, Andre T, Achille E, et al. FOLFIRI followed by FOLFOX6 or the reverse sequence in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized GERCOR study. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jan 15. 22(2):229-37. [Medline].

  123. Arkenau HT, Arnold D, Cassidy J, Diaz-Rubio E, Douillard JY, Hochster H, et al. Efficacy of oxaliplatin plus capecitabine or infusional fluorouracil/leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Dec 20. 26(36):5910-7. [Medline].

  124. Sehgal R, Lembersky BC, Rajasenan KK, et al. A Phase I/II Study of Capecitabine Given on a Week on/Week off Schedule Combined With Bevacizumab and Oxaliplatin for Patients With Untreated Advanced Colorectal Cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2011 Jun. 10(2):117-20. [Medline].

  125. Chustecka Z. Stop using calcium and magnesium with oxaliplatin. Medscape Medical News. June 3, 2013. [Full Text].

  126. Chustecka Z. Bevacizumab’s indication extended in colorectal cancer. Medscape Medical News. Jan 24, 2013. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/778116. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

  127. Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR, Zhao WK, Lee JK, Doubeni CA, et al. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3. 370(14):1298-306. [Medline].

  128. Given Imaging Receives FDA Clearance for PillCam® COLON in Patients Following Incomplete Colonoscopy. Given Imaging. Available at http://www.givenimaging.com/en-us/Innovative-Solutions/Capsule-Endoscopy/pillcam-colon/Pages/COLON-Press-release.aspx. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

  129. Laidman J. Colonoscopy May Reduce Late-Stage Colon Cancer Risk by 70%. Available at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/780259. Accessed: January 27, 2016.

 
Previous
Next
 
Standard colectomies for adenocarcinoma of the colon.
Table 1. TNM Staging System for Colon Cancer
Stage Primary Tumor (T) Regional Lymph Node (N) Remote Metastasis (M)
Stage 0 Carcinoma in situ (Tis) N0 M0
Stage I Tumor may invade submucosa (T1) or muscularis propria (T2) N0 M0
Stage II Tumor invades muscularis (T3) or adjacent organs or structures (T4) N0 M0
Stage IIA T3 N0 M0
Stage IIB T4a N0 M0
Stage IIC T4b N0 M0
Stage IIIA T1-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IIIB T1-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IIIC T3-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IVA T1-4 N1-3 M1a
Stage IVB T1-4 N1-3 M1b
Table 1. TNM Staging System for Colon Cancer
Stage Primary Tumor (T) Regional Lymph Node (N) Remote Metastasis (M)
Stage 0 Carcinoma in situ (Tis) N0 M0
Stage I Tumor may invade submucosa (T1) or muscularis propria (T2) N0 M0
Stage II Tumor invades muscularis (T3) or adjacent organs or structures (T4) N0 M0
Stage IIA T3 N0 M0
Stage IIB T4a N0 M0
Stage IIC T4b N0 M0
Stage IIIA T1-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IIIB T1-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IIIC T3-4 N1-2 M0
Stage IVA T1-4 N1-3 M1a
Stage IVB T1-4 N1-3 M1b
Table 2. Surveillance recommendations for stage II and III colon cancer
Parameter Organization
ESMO [JSMO](2013) ASCO (2013) NCCN (2016)
History and physical exam Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 -12 mo at 4 and 5 y Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y Every 3-6 mo for 2 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y
CEA Every 3-6 mo for 3 y, then every 6 -12 mo at 4 and 5 y Every 3 mo for 3 y* Every 3-6 mo for 2 y, then every 6 mo to 5 y
Chest CT* Every 6-12 mo for first 3 y Every 1 y for 3 y Every 1 y for 5 y
Colonoscopy** At y 1 after surgery, and every 3-5 y thereafter At 1 y, then every 5 y, dictated by the findings on the previous colonoscopy At 1 y, 3 y, then every 5 y if negative
Abdominal CT* Every 6-12 mo for first 3 y Every 1 y for 3 y Every 6-12 mo for up to 5 y; scans to include chest and pelvis
ESMO = European Society of Medical Oncology; JSMO = Japanese Society of Medical Oncology; ASCO = American Society of Clinical Oncology; NCCN = National Comprehensive Cancer Network; CEA = carcinoembryonic antigen; CT = computed tomography



* For patients at high risk for recurrence (eg, lymphatic or venous invasion, or poorly differentiated tumors).



**Colonoscopy should be performed 3-6 mo postoperatively if preoperative colonoscopy was not done, due to an obstructing lesion; otherwise, colonoscopy in 1 y; if abnormal, repeat in 1 year; if no advanced adenoma (ie, villous polyp, polyp > 1 cm, or high-grade dysplasia), repeat in 3 y, then every 5 y.



Previous
Next
 
 
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.