Topic Editors

Dr. Ioannis Ntanasis-Stathopoulos
Department of Clinical Therapeutics, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11528 Athens, Greece
Dr. Diamantis I. Tsilimigras
Wexner Medical Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: From Laboratory to Clinical Studies

Abstract submission deadline
31 October 2023
Manuscript submission deadline
31 December 2023
Viewed by
1517

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks third in terms of incidence among both men and women, and it is also the third most common cause of cancer-related death in the USA. It has always been acknowledged as a diverse disease, whose clinical course varies depending on the prognosis and response to treatment of each patient. Researchers and doctors are switching from a “one size fits all” approach to treating the disease to the identification of novel biomarkers that can be targeted to specifically treat each patient. The widespread use of next-generation sequencing techniques and liquid biopsies has enhanced our understanding of the molecular landscape of metastatic CRC. However, most patients with metastatic CRC need to receive treatment using a multimodal strategy that incorporates surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy/immunotherapy. Determining the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the onset and progression of this incurable cancer as well as the specific biomarkers connected to it will help with cancer detection and will improve prognosis. The core of tailored therapy in the twenty-first century is the multidisciplinary approach to the care of metastatic CRC, which combines fundamental and translational research with bedside clinical research. This Topic focuses on preclinical and clinical studies on metastatic CRC. We invite experts in molecular pathology, hematology–oncology, hematopathology, stem cells, immunotherapy, surgery, and other areas of cancer research to submit high-quality original studies or reviews related to the issues in this research area.

Dr. Ioannis Ntanasis-Stathopoulos
Dr. Diamantis I. Tsilimigras
Topic Editors

Keywords

  • colorectal cancer
  • metastasis
  • liver metastasis
  • resection
  • surgery
  • neoadjuvant
  • adjuvant
  • immunotherapy
  • targeted therapy
  • chemotherapy

Participating Journals

Journal Name Impact Factor CiteScore Launched Year First Decision (median) APC
Cancers
cancers
6.575 5.8 2009 17.4 Days 2600 CHF Submit
Current Oncology
curroncol
3.109 3.5 1994 19.6 Days 1800 CHF Submit
Gastrointestinal Disorders
gastrointestdisord
- - 2019 21.4 Days 1200 CHF Submit
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
ijms
6.208 6.9 2000 15.9 Days 2500 CHF Submit
Journal of Clinical Medicine
jcm
4.964 4.4 2012 18 Days 2600 CHF Submit

Preprints is a platform dedicated to making early versions of research outputs permanently available and citable. MDPI journals allow posting on preprint servers such as Preprints.org prior to publication. For more details about reprints, please visit https://www.preprints.org.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Journals
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
Article
Comparative Study of Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Radical Surgery with or without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer with T4 Stage: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(3), 1145; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12031145 - 01 Feb 2023
Viewed by 215
Abstract
Background: Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in T4 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. The study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of radical surgery (RS) with HIPEC in T4 CRC. Methods: Adverse events after HIPEC were estimated by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse [...] Read more.
Background: Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in T4 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. The study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of radical surgery (RS) with HIPEC in T4 CRC. Methods: Adverse events after HIPEC were estimated by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. The efficacy was evaluated using recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the effects of confounders between groups. Results: Of the 417 patients (263 men and 154 women), 165 patients were treated with RS + HIPEC and 252 patients with RS alone. There was no significant difference in the incidence of all adverse events after PSM. Overall RFS and OS were not significantly different at 24 months (p = 0.580 and p = 0.072, respectively). However, in patients with T4b stage CRC (92.1% vs. 77.3%, p = 0.048) and tumor size ≥ 5 cm (93.0% vs. 80.9%, p = 0.029), RFS in the two groups showed a significant difference at 24 months. Conclusions: In summary, the safety of HIPEC in T4 CRC was confirmed. Compared with RS, though RS + HIPEC did not benefit the overall cohort at 24 months, RS + HIPEC could benefit patients with T4b stage CRC and tumor size ≥ 5 cm in RFS. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review
Current Landscape and Potential Challenges of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Microsatellite Stable Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma
Cancers 2023, 15(3), 863; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15030863 - 30 Jan 2023
Viewed by 545
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent cancer and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in Europe. High microsatellite instability (MSI-H) due to a deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) system can be found in 5% of metastatic CRC (mCRC) and [...] Read more.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent cancer and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in Europe. High microsatellite instability (MSI-H) due to a deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) system can be found in 5% of metastatic CRC (mCRC) and has been established as a biomarker of response to immunotherapy in these tumors. Therefore, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in mCRC with these characteristics were evaluated with results showing remarkable response rates and durations of response. The majority of mCRC cases have high levels of DNA mismatch repair proteins (pMMR) with consequent microsatellite stability or low instability (MSS or MSI-low), associated with an inherent resistance to ICIs. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the possible approaches to overcome the mechanisms of resistance and evaluates potential biomarkers to establish the role of ICIs in pMMR/MSS/MSI-L (MSS) mCRC. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Comparative Study of Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Mitomycin versus Lobaplatin for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy after Radical Surgery in Colorectal Cancer with High-risk Factors for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
Curr. Oncol. 2023, 30(2), 1488-1501; https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol30020114 - 21 Jan 2023
Viewed by 468
Abstract
Background: The drug selection of radical surgery (RS), with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), in pT4 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. Methods: Adverse events after HIPEC were estimated by common terminology criteria for adverse events version 5.0. The efficacy was evaluated using overall survival [...] Read more.
Background: The drug selection of radical surgery (RS), with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), in pT4 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. Methods: Adverse events after HIPEC were estimated by common terminology criteria for adverse events version 5.0. The efficacy was evaluated using overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free rate (RFR). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the influence of confounders between Mitomycin and Lobaplatin groups. Results: Of the 146 patients, from April 2020 to March 2021, 47 were managed with mitomycin and 99 with lobaplatin. There was no significant difference in the incidence of all adverse events between the two groups after PSM. OS and RFR were not significantly different between the two groups at 22 months (p = 0.410; p = 0.310). OS and RFR of the two groups also showed no significant difference for patients with T4a or T4b stage, tumor size < or ≥ 5 cm. Among patients with colon cancer, RFR at 22 months of the two groups was significantly different (100.0% vs. 63.2%, p = 0.028). Conclusions: In summary, the safety of mitomycin and lobaplatin for HIPEC was not different. Compared with lobaplatin, mitomycin for HIPEC after RS could benefit patients with colon cancer in RFR. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop