Colon Cancer Liver Metastases, Hepatectomy, Liver Diseases, Liver Neoplasms, Malignant Neoplasm of Large Intestine Metastatic to Liver, Secondary Malignant Neoplasm of Liver, Surgery
Conditions
Keywords
Colorectal liver metastases, Liver Surgery, ALPPS, Two Stage Hepatectomy, Surgical Oncology, Hepatectomy
Brief summary
Surgical resection has offered the best option for prolonged survival in patients with colorectal liver metastases. Limiting factor for major liver resections is the size of the future liver remnant (FLR). In case of normal liver function, 30% of the total liver volume is considered to be sufficient to maintain adequate liver function after resection. In an attempt to further increase resectability criteria for patients with too small FLR surgical and interventional maneuvers such as portal vein embolization and portal vein ligation in two-stage hepatectomies have been implemented, but they need an interval of 4-8 weeks to achieve sufficient hypertrophy. In order to obtain adequate but rapid parenchymal hypertrophy a new surgical two-step technique, ALPPS, was introduced for oncological patients requiring extended hepatic resection with limited functional reserve. Both procedures can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality. The investigators conclude that it is time to perform a randomized study comparing the two surgical approaches in regard to oncological outcome.
Interventions
PROCEDUREALPPS
For detailed information please refer to description of experimental arm
PROCEDURETWO STAGE HEPATECTOMY
For detailed information please refer to description of active comparator arm
Sponsors
University of Zurich
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
Patients fulfilling all of the following inclusion criteria may be enrolled in the study: * Male or female patients above 18 years of age. * Patients with multifocal CRLM with a FLR/TLV (Total Liver Volume)\< 30% OR a FLR/BW (Bodyweight) ratio of \< 0.5. * Patients with colorectal primary tumor not yet resected may be included as long as the extrahepatic disease may be cured surgically (liver first strategy). * Patients with lung metastases may be included in the study as long as the lung metastases are potentially curable by resection by judgment of a thoracic surgery consultant. * Chemotherapy response according to RECIST: regression or stable disease. * The indication for surgery should be discussed at a multidisciplinary tumor board attended by hepatobiliary surgeons, oncologists, hepatologists and radiologists. * Written informed consent given by the patient after discussing the trial with the patient in a language he/she understands. * For women of chlidbearing age: Not currently breastfeeding; usage of effective contraception if sexually active; not pregnant and agreement not to become pregnant during the 12 months thereafter. A negative pregnancy test before inclusion into the trial is required for women, who are not yet menopausal, had their last menses within less than 12 months or have not had uterus and or ovaries removed surgically or undergone tubal ligation.
Exclusion criteria
The presence of any one of the following
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 Year Disease-free Survival | 1 year after Randomization | The primary objective will be disease-free survival at one year after randomization as determined by PET-CT (Positron emission tomography - Computer tomography), when not available by CT (Computer tomography) Thorax/Abdomen. This will be assessed by two independent radiologists who will be blinded to which arm the patient was enrolled in. Patients who died, are lost to follow up or are too sick to undergo imaging will be censored and counted as failures to reach the primary endpoint. Patients may need resection of their primary tumor after the study intervention (liver first strategy). They may develop recurrence within the study period, systemic or in the liver. In these patients ablation, reoperation and chemotherapy are used as customary clinical routine. Whether they achieved tumor free survival however depends only on the PET-CT or CT Thorax Abdomen at one year. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Procedure-associated Complications | Up to 1 year after Randomization | Complications during the postoperative period will be recorded using the Clavien-Dindo Classification, also known as the Zurich Classification, which grades surgical Complications on a scale from 1 to 5 (death of patient). Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA: Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. |
| Percentage of patients in which complete curative two-staged surgery was possible. | Up to 1 year after Randomization | The percentage of patients, in which a complete curative two-staged surgical procedure was possible, will be assessed. Complete is defined as successful completion of both surgical steps of the procedure, i.e.: * step 1: cleaning of tumorlesions in the future liver remnant (FLR) and portal vein ligation of the contralateral segments to induce hypertrophy of the FLR (with or without in situ split/transsection). * step 2: resection of the tumorbearing part of the liver, leaving a tumor-free FLR in situ. Curative is defined as achieving a tumorfree FLR after step 2 with no signs of extrahepatic tumor existance. (If patients have the primary tumor or potentially resectable lung metastases, which will be approached surgically in the future treatment of the patient in a curative intent, then the procedure does count as curative). |
| Complete (R0) vs. incomplete (R1/2) resection (oncological outcome) | 1 year after Randomization | A consensus between pathologists and surgeons on the R-status of the resection, judging both stages separately and together. Through re-resection R0 may be achieved overall even if there was a R1 resection after stage 1. |
| Overall survival (oncological outcome) | Up to 10 years after Randomization | From date of randomization until the date of death from any cause, assessed up to 10 years. Regular further follow up-visits after assessment of the primary endpoint at 1 year are planned 1.5, 2, 3, 5 and 10 years after Randomization. |
| Procedure-associated Mortality | Up to 1 year after Randomization | All deaths will be recorded in the 12 month-period after randomization. Specifically, the number of patients, which suffer a fatal event due to the procedure during the postoperative period, will be calculated to assess the safety of the two interventions. |
| Radiographic liver volumetric changes | Up to 1 year after Randomization | Volumetry 1 performed before stage 1 of procedure Volumetry 2 performed before stage 2 of procedure All volumetries are performed locally via magnet resonance Imaging or computertomography and reported into a respective volumetry Case Report Form (CRF). |
| Incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure | Up to 1 year after Randomization | The incidence of posthepatectomy liver failure is assessed according to the definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS), which separates 3 different grades of posthepatectomy liver failure (Grade A to C). Rahbari, N. N., et al. (2011). Posthepatectomy liver failure: a definition and grading by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS). Surgery 149(5): 713-724. |
| Incidence of posthepatectomy renal failure | Up to 1 year after Randomization | Measurement of the following parameter at screening visit, during the postoperative course of stage 1 & 2 (postoperative days 1,2,3,5,7) and at follow-up visits: * Creatinin \[Unit: µmol/l\] This parameter is used to calculate and assess the incidence of posthepatecomy renal failure according to the AKIN-criteria. Ricci, Z., et al. (2011). Classification and staging of acute kidney injury: beyond the RIFLE and AKIN criteria. Nat Rev Nephrol 7(4): 201-208. |
| Quality of Life (QoL) | Up to 1 year after Randomization | Will be evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for Quality of Life in Cancer. Visual Analogue Scale determines QoL on a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best). First Baseline Assessment before stage 1 procedure. Assessment after procedure step 1. Assessment before stage 2 procedure. Assessment after procedure step 2. Regular assessments during scheduled and unscheduled follow-up visits. |
Countries
Switzerland
Contacts
Primary ContactMarcel A Schneider, MD
Backup ContactPierre-Alain Clavien, MD, PhD
Outcome results
None listed