Colorectal CancerPOST-1NCT03588416
Multicentric Study About Pathological Risk Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis in Malignant Colorectal Polyps
An observational study of Colorectal Cancer and Lymph Node Metastasis, run by Dario Parini at 1 site in Italy.
Trial summary
Colorectal cancer screening showed an increased incidence of malignant colorectal polyps pT1 after endoscopic excision. Their management is not yet standardized, for the presence of histological features increasing early lymph node involvement. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Colorectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastasis, Colorectal Polyp
- How many people
- 615 participants
- Where
- 1 siteItaly
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2018to 28 Feb 2022
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients who underwent an endoscopic colorectal polypectomy with pathologic diagnosis of malignant polyp pT1
Who may be able to join
- All patients who underwent an endoscopic colorectal polypectomy for malignant polyp pT1
Who cannot join
- Age < 18 years
- Gastrointestinal cancer previously diagnosticated or synchronous
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Italy1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia - ULSS 5 Polesana
Rovigo, 45100
Dario Parini, +39 0425 393559, dario.parini@gmail.com
About this study
Official title: Management of Malignant Colorectal Polyps (T1) After Endoscopic Polypectomy: Follow-up vs Surgery and Analysis of Pathological Risk Factors for Lymph Nodes Metastasis. A Retrospective and Prospective Multicentric Observational Study.
Colorectal cancer screening showed an increased incidence of malignant colorectal polyps pT1 after endoscopic excision. Their management is not yet standardized, for the presence of histological features increasing early lymph node involvement. The literature has proposed several histopathological criteria, for which the risk of lymph node metastasis can vary (6-20%), but final data are not yet available.
Aim 1.To collect data about patients undergoing an endoscopic polypectomy with histologic finding of pT1, retrospectively and prospectively, dividing both databases into two groups, endoscopic group (EG) and surgical group (SG) Aim 2. To analyze retrospectively which pathological criteria can increase the risk of lymph node metastasis and to elaborate a prognostic score for lymph node metastatic risk Aim 3. To verify prospectively the prognostic score capacity on predicting lymph node metastasis Aim 4. To calculate the disease free survival, overall survival, local recurrence rate and distal recurrence rate and verify if there is a difference between EG and SG
Read more
According to literature, the most important histopathological criteria to establish the high risk of lymph node metastasis are:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue (high risk: <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy)
- Depth of submucosa invasion (high risk: >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps; Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps)
- Vascular invasion (high risk: presence)
- Lymphatic invasion (high risk: presence)
- Tumor budding (high risk: presence)
- Tumor differentiation (high risk: grade G3-G4 or mucinous)
A database will be used by all participating centres for collecting clinical and pathological data. All the analyses will be centralized by the PI. Uni-multivariate analyses will be conducted at the end of data collection for retrospective arm and at 2 years of follow-up for prospective arm.
Impact: This study aimed to investigate pathological risk factors for lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal polyps after endoscopic polypectomy; their accurate identification could lead to improve their management, avoiding useless complementary surgery. Results could change clinical practice and reduce health-related costs.
Read the detailed description
The management of malignant colorectal tumors pT1 after polypectomy is not yet standardized, for the presence of histological features increasing early lymph node involvement. Three recent meta-analysis have identified some pathological criteria influencing the risk of lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer, but there is not agreement in the conclusions between these articles. Because this uncertainty, the decision making criteria for this patients can be different in every Institute. Furthermore, the majority of the literature refers to surgical patients, with lack in demonstrating, at long-term, the absence of lymph nodes metastasis in patients not operated after endoscopic polypectomy.
Retrospective study:
From a retrospective period of 6 years, with at list 2 years of follow-up, all patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy for malignant colorectal polyp pT1, will be enrolled for the study.
The patients will be divided into two groups: patients who did only the endoscopic treatment (EG), and patients who underwent complementary surgery (SG).
The most important histopathological criteria to list in the database, when available (to establish the high risk of lymph node metastasis) are as follows:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue (high risk: <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy)
- Depth of submucosa invasion (high risk: >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps and Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps)
- Vascular invasion (high risk: presence); method of determination (Hematoxylin \& Eosin or immunohistochemical marker)
- Lymphatic invasion (high risk: presence); method of determination (Hematoxylin \& Eosin or immunohistochemical marker)
- Tumor budding (high risk: presence)
- Tumor differentiation (high risk: grade G3-G4 or mucinous)
Other data to be reported are as follows:
- Demographic and clinical data for all patients
- Decisional context (multidisciplinary group decision; single specialist decision; patient decision) and decision making criteria for complementary surgery for all patients
- Type of surgical resection for SG, access (laparotomy, laparoscopy or transanal), site of lesion (right, transverse, left, sigmoid colon or rectum)
- Histopathological criteria, other than the 6 high risk criteria above
- Histopathological finding after surgical resection for SG
- Postoperative data (hospital stay, morbidity with Clavien-Dindo's classification) for SG
- Type and length of follow-up for all patients (EG and SG) (endoscopic surveillance, thoracic and abdominal CT scan, positron emission computed tomography (PET-CT), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) determination, clinical examination)
Prospective study:
According to the histological characteristics, the patients will be considered with low risk (without any histological criteria), or with high risk (with at least one of six criteria).
The histopathological criteria to consider the malignant polyps at high risk of lymph node metastasis are as follows:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy
- Depth of submucosa invasion >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps and Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps
- Presence of vascular invasion, determined with the immunohistochemical marker CD34 or, in alternative, with Hematoxylin \& Eosin
- Presence of lymphatic invasion, determined with the immunohistochemical marker D2-40 or, in alternative, with Hematoxylin \& Eosin
- Presence of tumor budding (low and high grade)
- Tumor differentiation grade G3-G4 or mucinous
Patients who will present at least one of these six criteria, will be considered at high risk for lymph node metastasis.
Every Institute will take an independent decision about therapeutic strategy: only endoscopic treatment (EG), or complementary surgery (SG).
To participate to the prospective study, is mandatory to obtain these 6 pathological characteristics.
It is strongly recommended a multidisciplinary discussion for all patients, in presence of at least one surgeon, one endoscopist, one pathologist and one oncologist, as well as one radiotherapist for rectal lesions.
The surgical resection for the colon can be performed with laparotomic, laparoscopic or robotic approach, based on single Institute surgical experience. For the rectum, the surgical approach (laparotomic, laparoscopic, robotic, transanal resection) will be decided by the surgical team in accordance with the multidisciplinary group, based on single Institute experience and patient clinical features.
All patients (EG and SG) have to perform within one month from diagnosis or, in any way, before the surgery for SG, a thoracic and abdominal CT scan with contrast (for staging) and CEA determination.
The histopathological finding to be reported after surgical resection for SG are as follows: number of lymph nodes, number of metastatic lymph nodes, margin distance from the site of polypectomy, local residual tumor.
Follow-up program:
- EG: colonoscopy at 6 and 12 months for colic lesions, recto-sigmoidoscopy at 6, 18 and 24 months and colonoscopy at 12 months for rectal lesions
- SG: colonoscopy at 12 months for colic lesions, recto-sigmoidoscopy at 6, 18 and 24 months and colonoscopy at 12 months for rectal lesions
- Thoracic and abdominal CT scan with contrast at 12 and 24 months
- Clinical examination and CEA determination at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months
Statistic analysis:
Retrospective study: considering a 10% prevalence of pN+ patients with pT1 colorectal tumor, including the above 6 histopathological criteria as predictors in logistic regression model, the investigators estimate to retrospectively collect data from 600 patients.
The continuous numerical data will be expressed as average and standard deviation or as median and interquartile range, if appropriate. A descriptive analysis for collected variables will be done and the pN+ prevalence will be calculated. A logistic recession model will be estimated, for evaluating the 6 histopathological criteria effect on presence of lymph node metastasis. Furthermore, the disease-free survival will be calculated with Kaplan-Meier method. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered significant. Statistic analysis will be done with Software 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
Prospective study: the investigators want to evaluate a sensibility of 0.80 for overall histopathological criterion (i.e., patients with at least one of six criteria are considered at high risk, patients without the six criteria are at low risk), in order that the maximum estimation error does not exceed 0.10, with a 95% confidence interval. Considering a 10% prevalence of pN+ patients with pT1 colorectal tumor, including the above 6 histopathological criteria as predictors in logistic regression model, the investigators estimate to prospectively collect data from 615 patients.
The continuous numerical data will be expressed as average and standard deviation or as median and interquartile range, if appropriate. A descriptive analysis for collected variables will be done and the pN+ prevalence will be calculated. The diagnostic capacity of the overall histopathological criterion will be evaluated calculating sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy. A similar evaluation will be done for every single histopathological criterion with explorative purpose, if appropriate. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered significant. Statistic analysis will be done with Software 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
Statement:
With the retrospective observational study, the investigators can quickly have an extended overview about the current management of endoscopic pT1, to verify if there is, in fact, decisional heterogeneity, and to analyze the pathological criteria influence in lymph nodes metastasis. The limit of retrospective study, in the other side, is data heterogeneity, but this topic is recent, and it is normal not to have uniformity between different Institutes. This problem could be solved with the prospective study, where pathological criteria are included in the protocol itself. The strong points in this prospective project are: 1) uniformity in pathological analysis, 2) without any mandatory indication for complementary surgery, in order to maintain the observational nature of the study; 3) the multidisciplinary discussion for every patient, an aspect more and more required by hospital administrations, and 4) the uniformity in follow-up, that is a feature not yet clear in the literature for endoscopic pT1. Furthermore, this prospective study can be the base to create a national register, to set up future studies on this topic, as analysis of tumor molecular characteristics.
The elaboration of this protocol followed the STROBE statement Guidelines and Explanation.
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastasis, Colorectal Polyp
- Keywords
- pT1, Polypectomy, Lymph node metastasis, Colorectal neoplasm
- Medical subject headings
- Colorectal Neoplasms, Lymphatic Metastasis
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of patients with lymph nodes metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer
The six pathological criteria will be tested as independent predictors of lymph node metastasis
Measured: Enrollment
Disease free survival in EG and SG and in patients with and without high risk factors
Measured: 24 months
Secondary outcomes (5)
Developing a clinical prognostic score for lymph node metastasis
The clinical prognostic score will be calculated from pathological criteria and clinical risk factors (i.e. sex, age, tumor localization, size)
Measured: Enrollment
Validating the clinical prognostic score as predictor of lymph node metastasis
Measured: Enrollment
Overall survival
Measured: 24 months
Local and distal recurrence rate in EG and SG and in high risk patients and low risk patients
Measured: 24 months
Sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests in detecting pathologic lymph nodes
Measured: Enrollment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Jul 2018
- Study start1 Mar 2018
- Primary completion29 Feb 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion28 Feb 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (11)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colorectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Other
- Enrolment
- 615 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Dario Parini
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Dario Parini, Azienda Ospedaliera di Perugia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03588416
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1359CESC
- Acronym
- POST-1
- Status last verified
- Sep 2018
- First submitted
- 28 May 2018
- Last updated
- 28 Sep 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Mou S, Soetikno R, Shimoda T, Rouse R, Kaltenbach T. Pathologic predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in submucosal invasive (T1) colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2013 Aug;27(8):2692-703. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-2835-5. Epub 2013 Feb 8.
PubMed 23392988Beaton C, Twine CP, Williams GL, Radcliffe AG. Systematic review and meta-analysis of histopathological factors influencing the risk of lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013 Jul;15(7):788-97. doi: 10.1111/codi.12129.
PubMed 23331927Wada H, Shiozawa M, Katayama K, Okamoto N, Miyagi Y, Rino Y, Masuda M, Akaike M. Systematic review and meta-analysis of histopathological predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in T1 colorectal cancer. J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jul;50(7):727-34. doi: 10.1007/s00535-015-1057-0. Epub 2015 Mar 1.
PubMed 25725617Haggitt RC, Glotzbach RE, Soffer EE, Wruble LD. Prognostic factors in colorectal carcinomas arising in adenomas: implications for lesions removed by endoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology. 1985 Aug;89(2):328-36. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(85)90333-6.
PubMed 4007423Kikuchi R, Takano M, Takagi K, Fujimoto N, Nozaki R, Fujiyoshi T, Uchida Y. Management of early invasive colorectal cancer. Risk of recurrence and clinical guidelines. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995 Dec;38(12):1286-95. doi: 10.1007/BF02049154.
PubMed 7497841Ueno H, Murphy J, Jass JR, Mochizuki H, Talbot IC. Tumour 'budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer. Histopathology. 2002 Feb;40(2):127-32. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.2002.01324.x.
PubMed 11952856van de Velde CJ, Boelens PG, Borras JM, Coebergh JW, Cervantes A, Blomqvist L, Beets-Tan RG, van den Broek CB, Brown G, Van Cutsem E, Espin E, Haustermans K, Glimelius B, Iversen LH, van Krieken JH, Marijnen CA, Henning G, Gore-Booth J, Meldolesi E, Mroczkowski P, Nagtegaal I, Naredi P, Ortiz H, Pahlman L, Quirke P, Rodel C, Roth A, Rutten H, Schmoll HJ, Smith JJ, Tanis PJ, Taylor C, Wibe A, Wiggers T, Gambacorta MA, Aristei C, Valentini V. EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary management: European consensus conference colon & rectum. Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jan;50(1):1.e1-1.e34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.048. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
PubMed 24183379Bartel MJ, Brahmbhatt BS, Wallace MB. Management of colorectal T1 carcinoma treated by endoscopic resection from the Western perspective. Dig Endosc. 2016 Apr;28(3):330-41. doi: 10.1111/den.12598. Epub 2016 Feb 16.
PubMed 26718885Steele SR, Chang GJ, Hendren S, Weiser M, Irani J, Buie WD, Rafferty JF; Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Practice Guideline for the Surveillance of Patients After Curative Treatment of Colon and Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015 Aug;58(8):713-25. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000410.
PubMed 26163950von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):800-4. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577654.
PubMed 18049194Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, Poole C, Schlesselman JJ, Egger M; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):805-35. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577511.
PubMed 18049195
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Sep 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Management of Malignant Colorectal Polyps (T1) After Endoscopic Polypectomy: Follow-up vs Surgery and Analysis of Pathological Risk Factors for Lymph Nodes Metastasis. A Retrospective and Prospective Multicentric Observational Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03588416
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- POST-1 / 1359CESC
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastasis, Colorectal Polyp
- Keywords
- pT1, Polypectomy, Lymph node metastasis, Colorectal neoplasm
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 615 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Dario PariniUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 29 Feb 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 28 Feb 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 17 Jul 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Colorectal cancer screening showed an increased incidence of malignant colorectal polyps pT1 after endoscopic excision. Their management is not yet standardized, for the presence of histological features increasing early lymph node involvement. The literature has proposed several histopathological criteria, for which the risk of lymph node metastasis can vary (6-20%), but final data are not yet available.
Aim 1.To collect data about patients undergoing an endoscopic polypectomy with histologic finding of pT1, retrospectively and prospectively, dividing both databases into two groups, endoscopic group (EG) and surgical group (SG) Aim 2. To analyze retrospectively which pathological criteria can increase the risk of lymph node metastasis and to elaborate a prognostic score for lymph node metastatic risk Aim 3. To verify prospectively the prognostic score capacity on predicting lymph node metastasis Aim 4. To calculate the disease free survival, overall survival, local recurrence rate and distal recurrence rate and verify if there is a difference between EG and SG
According to literature, the most important histopathological criteria to establish the high risk of lymph node metastasis are:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue (high risk: <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy)
- Depth of submucosa invasion (high risk: >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps; Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps)
- Vascular invasion (high risk: presence)
- Lymphatic invasion (high risk: presence)
- Tumor budding (high risk: presence)
- Tumor differentiation (high risk: grade G3-G4 or mucinous)
A database will be used by all participating centres for collecting clinical and pathological data. All the analyses will be centralized by the PI. Uni-multivariate analyses will be conducted at the end of data collection for retrospective arm and at 2 years of follow-up for prospective arm.
Impact: This study aimed to investigate pathological risk factors for lymph node metastasis in pT1 colorectal polyps after endoscopic polypectomy; their accurate identification could lead to improve their management, avoiding useless complementary surgery. Results could change clinical practice and reduce health-related costs.
Detailed description
The management of malignant colorectal tumors pT1 after polypectomy is not yet standardized, for the presence of histological features increasing early lymph node involvement. Three recent meta-analysis have identified some pathological criteria influencing the risk of lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer, but there is not agreement in the conclusions between these articles. Because this uncertainty, the decision making criteria for this patients can be different in every Institute. Furthermore, the majority of the literature refers to surgical patients, with lack in demonstrating, at long-term, the absence of lymph nodes metastasis in patients not operated after endoscopic polypectomy.
Retrospective study:
From a retrospective period of 6 years, with at list 2 years of follow-up, all patients who underwent endoscopic polypectomy for malignant colorectal polyp pT1, will be enrolled for the study.
The patients will be divided into two groups: patients who did only the endoscopic treatment (EG), and patients who underwent complementary surgery (SG).
The most important histopathological criteria to list in the database, when available (to establish the high risk of lymph node metastasis) are as follows:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue (high risk: <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy)
- Depth of submucosa invasion (high risk: >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps and Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps)
- Vascular invasion (high risk: presence); method of determination (Hematoxylin \& Eosin or immunohistochemical marker)
- Lymphatic invasion (high risk: presence); method of determination (Hematoxylin \& Eosin or immunohistochemical marker)
- Tumor budding (high risk: presence)
- Tumor differentiation (high risk: grade G3-G4 or mucinous)
Other data to be reported are as follows:
- Demographic and clinical data for all patients
- Decisional context (multidisciplinary group decision; single specialist decision; patient decision) and decision making criteria for complementary surgery for all patients
- Type of surgical resection for SG, access (laparotomy, laparoscopy or transanal), site of lesion (right, transverse, left, sigmoid colon or rectum)
- Histopathological criteria, other than the 6 high risk criteria above
- Histopathological finding after surgical resection for SG
- Postoperative data (hospital stay, morbidity with Clavien-Dindo's classification) for SG
- Type and length of follow-up for all patients (EG and SG) (endoscopic surveillance, thoracic and abdominal CT scan, positron emission computed tomography (PET-CT), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) determination, clinical examination)
Prospective study:
According to the histological characteristics, the patients will be considered with low risk (without any histological criteria), or with high risk (with at least one of six criteria).
The histopathological criteria to consider the malignant polyps at high risk of lymph node metastasis are as follows:
- Lateral margin of healthy tissue <1mm and piecemeal polypectomy
- Depth of submucosa invasion >1000 μM or sm2-sm3 for sessile polyps and Haggitt level 4 for pedunculated polyps
- Presence of vascular invasion, determined with the immunohistochemical marker CD34 or, in alternative, with Hematoxylin \& Eosin
- Presence of lymphatic invasion, determined with the immunohistochemical marker D2-40 or, in alternative, with Hematoxylin \& Eosin
- Presence of tumor budding (low and high grade)
- Tumor differentiation grade G3-G4 or mucinous
Patients who will present at least one of these six criteria, will be considered at high risk for lymph node metastasis.
Every Institute will take an independent decision about therapeutic strategy: only endoscopic treatment (EG), or complementary surgery (SG).
To participate to the prospective study, is mandatory to obtain these 6 pathological characteristics.
It is strongly recommended a multidisciplinary discussion for all patients, in presence of at least one surgeon, one endoscopist, one pathologist and one oncologist, as well as one radiotherapist for rectal lesions.
The surgical resection for the colon can be performed with laparotomic, laparoscopic or robotic approach, based on single Institute surgical experience. For the rectum, the surgical approach (laparotomic, laparoscopic, robotic, transanal resection) will be decided by the surgical team in accordance with the multidisciplinary group, based on single Institute experience and patient clinical features.
All patients (EG and SG) have to perform within one month from diagnosis or, in any way, before the surgery for SG, a thoracic and abdominal CT scan with contrast (for staging) and CEA determination.
The histopathological finding to be reported after surgical resection for SG are as follows: number of lymph nodes, number of metastatic lymph nodes, margin distance from the site of polypectomy, local residual tumor.
Follow-up program:
- EG: colonoscopy at 6 and 12 months for colic lesions, recto-sigmoidoscopy at 6, 18 and 24 months and colonoscopy at 12 months for rectal lesions
- SG: colonoscopy at 12 months for colic lesions, recto-sigmoidoscopy at 6, 18 and 24 months and colonoscopy at 12 months for rectal lesions
- Thoracic and abdominal CT scan with contrast at 12 and 24 months
- Clinical examination and CEA determination at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months
Statistic analysis:
Retrospective study: considering a 10% prevalence of pN+ patients with pT1 colorectal tumor, including the above 6 histopathological criteria as predictors in logistic regression model, the investigators estimate to retrospectively collect data from 600 patients.
The continuous numerical data will be expressed as average and standard deviation or as median and interquartile range, if appropriate. A descriptive analysis for collected variables will be done and the pN+ prevalence will be calculated. A logistic recession model will be estimated, for evaluating the 6 histopathological criteria effect on presence of lymph node metastasis. Furthermore, the disease-free survival will be calculated with Kaplan-Meier method. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered significant. Statistic analysis will be done with Software 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
Prospective study: the investigators want to evaluate a sensibility of 0.80 for overall histopathological criterion (i.e., patients with at least one of six criteria are considered at high risk, patients without the six criteria are at low risk), in order that the maximum estimation error does not exceed 0.10, with a 95% confidence interval. Considering a 10% prevalence of pN+ patients with pT1 colorectal tumor, including the above 6 histopathological criteria as predictors in logistic regression model, the investigators estimate to prospectively collect data from 615 patients.
The continuous numerical data will be expressed as average and standard deviation or as median and interquartile range, if appropriate. A descriptive analysis for collected variables will be done and the pN+ prevalence will be calculated. The diagnostic capacity of the overall histopathological criterion will be evaluated calculating sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy. A similar evaluation will be done for every single histopathological criterion with explorative purpose, if appropriate. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered significant. Statistic analysis will be done with Software 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
Statement:
With the retrospective observational study, the investigators can quickly have an extended overview about the current management of endoscopic pT1, to verify if there is, in fact, decisional heterogeneity, and to analyze the pathological criteria influence in lymph nodes metastasis. The limit of retrospective study, in the other side, is data heterogeneity, but this topic is recent, and it is normal not to have uniformity between different Institutes. This problem could be solved with the prospective study, where pathological criteria are included in the protocol itself. The strong points in this prospective project are: 1) uniformity in pathological analysis, 2) without any mandatory indication for complementary surgery, in order to maintain the observational nature of the study; 3) the multidisciplinary discussion for every patient, an aspect more and more required by hospital administrations, and 4) the uniformity in follow-up, that is a feature not yet clear in the literature for endoscopic pT1. Furthermore, this prospective study can be the base to create a national register, to set up future studies on this topic, as analysis of tumor molecular characteristics.
The elaboration of this protocol followed the STROBE statement Guidelines and Explanation.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Other
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients who underwent an endoscopic colorectal polypectomy with pathologic diagnosis of malignant polyp pT1
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All patients who underwent an endoscopic colorectal polypectomy for malignant polyp pT1
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Age < 18 years
- Gastrointestinal cancer previously diagnosticated or synchronous
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Number of patients with lymph nodes metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer
Time frame: Enrollment
The six pathological criteria will be tested as independent predictors of lymph node metastasis
Disease free survival in EG and SG and in patients with and without high risk factors
Time frame: 24 months
5 secondary outcomes
Developing a clinical prognostic score for lymph node metastasis
Time frame: Enrollment
Validating the clinical prognostic score as predictor of lymph node metastasis
Time frame: Enrollment
Overall survival
Time frame: 24 months
Local and distal recurrence rate in EG and SG and in high risk patients and low risk patients
Time frame: 24 months
Sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests in detecting pathologic lymph nodes
Time frame: Enrollment
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Sep 2018.
- Background: PubMed 23392988Mou S, Soetikno R, Shimoda T, Rouse R, Kaltenbach T. Pathologic predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in submucosal invasive (T1) colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2013 Aug;27(8):2692-703. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-2835-5. Epub 2013 Feb 8.
- Background: PubMed 23331927Beaton C, Twine CP, Williams GL, Radcliffe AG. Systematic review and meta-analysis of histopathological factors influencing the risk of lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013 Jul;15(7):788-97. doi: 10.1111/codi.12129.
- Background: PubMed 25725617Wada H, Shiozawa M, Katayama K, Okamoto N, Miyagi Y, Rino Y, Masuda M, Akaike M. Systematic review and meta-analysis of histopathological predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in T1 colorectal cancer. J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jul;50(7):727-34. doi: 10.1007/s00535-015-1057-0. Epub 2015 Mar 1.
- Background: PubMed 4007423Haggitt RC, Glotzbach RE, Soffer EE, Wruble LD. Prognostic factors in colorectal carcinomas arising in adenomas: implications for lesions removed by endoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology. 1985 Aug;89(2):328-36. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(85)90333-6.
- Background: PubMed 7497841Kikuchi R, Takano M, Takagi K, Fujimoto N, Nozaki R, Fujiyoshi T, Uchida Y. Management of early invasive colorectal cancer. Risk of recurrence and clinical guidelines. Dis Colon Rectum. 1995 Dec;38(12):1286-95. doi: 10.1007/BF02049154.
- Background: PubMed 11952856Ueno H, Murphy J, Jass JR, Mochizuki H, Talbot IC. Tumour 'budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer. Histopathology. 2002 Feb;40(2):127-32. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.2002.01324.x.
- Background: PubMed 24183379van de Velde CJ, Boelens PG, Borras JM, Coebergh JW, Cervantes A, Blomqvist L, Beets-Tan RG, van den Broek CB, Brown G, Van Cutsem E, Espin E, Haustermans K, Glimelius B, Iversen LH, van Krieken JH, Marijnen CA, Henning G, Gore-Booth J, Meldolesi E, Mroczkowski P, Nagtegaal I, Naredi P, Ortiz H, Pahlman L, Quirke P, Rodel C, Roth A, Rutten H, Schmoll HJ, Smith JJ, Tanis PJ, Taylor C, Wibe A, Wiggers T, Gambacorta MA, Aristei C, Valentini V. EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary management: European consensus conference colon & rectum. Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jan;50(1):1.e1-1.e34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.048. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
- Background: PubMed 26718885Bartel MJ, Brahmbhatt BS, Wallace MB. Management of colorectal T1 carcinoma treated by endoscopic resection from the Western perspective. Dig Endosc. 2016 Apr;28(3):330-41. doi: 10.1111/den.12598. Epub 2016 Feb 16.
- Background: PubMed 26163950Steele SR, Chang GJ, Hendren S, Weiser M, Irani J, Buie WD, Rafferty JF; Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Practice Guideline for the Surveillance of Patients After Curative Treatment of Colon and Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015 Aug;58(8):713-25. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000410.
- Background: PubMed 18049194von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):800-4. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577654.
- Background: PubMed 18049195Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, Poole C, Schlesselman JJ, Egger M; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Epidemiology. 2007 Nov;18(6):805-35. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577511.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Colorectal Cancer
Recruiting
MRD Monitoring in Colorectal Cancer Using ctDNA
Colorectal Neoplasms, Colorectal Cancer (Diagnosis)
Recruiting
Studying the PAGODA Algorithm for Chemotherapy Dose Changes to Prevent Unplanned Treatment Delays
Ampulla of Vater Carcinoma, Appendix Carcinoma
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
Master Protocol for the Study of Rilogrotug for the Treatment of Weight Loss and Anorexia in Patients With Cancer Cachexia and mCRC or mNSCLC
Cachexia; Cancer, Cachexia
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Combination Chemotherapy With or Without Atezolizumab in Treating Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer and Deficient DNA Mismatch Repair
Colon Adenocarcinoma, DNA Repair Disorder
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Combining DCSZ11 With Radiation and Chemotherapy as Neoadjuvant Treatment for pMMR Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Rectal Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Colorectal Cancer and Lymph Node Metastasis, run by Dario Parini at 1 site in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Sep 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Dario Parini (+39 0425 393559, dario.parini@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of patients with lymph nodes metastasis in pT1 colorectal cancer (time frame: Enrollment). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03588416, which also lists 11 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Sep 2018.