Clinical management of patients with colorectal intramucosal carcinoma compared to high-grade dysplasia and T1 colorectal cancer

Edgard Medawar; Roupen Djinbachian; Douglas K Rex; Michael Vieth; Heiko Pohl; Ioana Popescu Crainic; Mahsa Taghiakbari; Paola Marques; Daniel Kaufman; Felix Huang; Daniel von Renteln

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2024.11.021

Clinical management of patients with colorectal intramucosal carcinoma compared to high-grade dysplasia and T1 colorectal cancer

Gastrointest Endosc. 2024 Nov 16:S0016-5107(24)03731-3. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.11.021. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; University of Montreal Hospital Research Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
² University of Montreal Hospital Research Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
³ Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
⁴ Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universitӓt Erlangen-Nürnberg, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
⁵ Gastroenterology and Hepatology, White River Junction Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, Vermont, USA.
⁶ University of Montreal Hospital Research Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
⁷ Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
⁸ University of Montreal Hospital Research Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Electronic address: [email protected].

PMID: 39557202
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.11.021

Abstract

Background and aims: In the colorectum, intramucosal carcinoma (IMC), like high-grade dysplasia (HGD), should be resected endoscopically. We were interested to understand how real-world treatment of IMC cases compares to management of HGD and T1 colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods: A multicenter cohort study was conducted. Through pathology databases, all patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2019 with HGD, IMC, or T1 CRC polyps at 3 hospitals in a regional Canadian center were identified. The primary outcome was the proportion of surgical management of IMC compared to HGD after complete endoscopic resection. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of synchronous advanced neoplasia (SAN) and the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for metachronous advanced neoplasia (MAN) in the 3 groups among patients eligible for follow-up.

Results: We identified 753 patients with IMC or HGD on a first pathology diagnosis, including 601 after complete endoscopic resection. Patients with IMC were more likely to undergo surgery after complete endoscopic resection compared to patients with HGD (10.5% [6 of 57] vs 0% [0 of 544], P < .001). A total of 455 patients had follow-up endoscopy and pathology (mean age, 67.1 years; 42.2% female; median follow-up, 3.4 years): 269 with HGD, 60 with IMC, and 126 with T1 CRC. Proportions of SAN were 24.2%, 26.7%, and 25.4% (P = .908). Compared to HGD, patients with IMC and T1 CRC had similar MAN risks (aHR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.43-1.59] and aHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.66-2.05], respectively). No lymph node findings were positive (0 of 363), and no metastasis occurred among patients with IMC.

Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with colorectal IMC were more likely to undergo surgery after complete endoscopic resection than when HGD was diagnosed, although they were not at increased risk of SAN or MAN in this study, and the known risk of nodal metastasis with colorectal IMC is small (0%-2%). Unless a patient diagnosed with IMC is particularly concerned with this small risk, complete endoscopic resection should be considered the definitive treatment for IMC and should not be followed by surgery.