No abstract

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an autosomal dominant inherited syndrome characterized by multiple adenomatous polyps (predisposing to colorectal cancer development) and numerous extracolonic manifestations. The underlying genetic burden generates variable clinical features that may influence operative management. As a precancerous hereditary condition, the rationale of performing a prophylactic surgery is a mainstay of FAP management. The purpose of the present paper is to bring up many controversial aspects regarding surgical treatment for FAP, and to discuss the results and perspectives of the operative choices and approaches. Preferably, the decision-making process should not be limited to the conventional confrontation of pros and cons of ileorectal anastomosis or restorative proctocolectomy. A wide discussion with the patient may evaluate issues such as age, genotype, family history, sphincter function, the presence or risk of desmoid disease, potential complications of each procedure and chances of postoperative surveillance. Therefore, the definition of the best moment and the choice of appropriate procedure constitute an individual decision that must take into consideration patient's preferences and full information about the complex nature of the disease. All these facts reinforce the idea that FAP patients should be managed by experienced surgeons working in specialized centers to achieve the best immediate and long-term results.

Sporadic colorectal cancer (CRC) is traditionally diagnosed after the sixth decade of life, and current recommendations for surveillance include only patients older than 50 years of age. However, an increasing incidence of CRC in patients less than 40 years of age has been reported. This occurrence has been attributed to different molecular features and low suspicion of CRC in young symptomatic individuals. When confronting young-onset CRC with older patients, issues such as biological aggressiveness, stage at diagnosis and clinical outcomes seem to differ in many aspects. In the future, the identification of the molecular profile underlying the early development of sporadic CRC will help to plan tailored screening recommendations and improve management. Besides that, differential diagnosis with CRC linked with hereditary syndromes is necessary to provide adequate patient treatment and family screening. Until we find the answers to some of these doubts, doctors should raise suspicion when evaluating an young adult and be aware of this risk and consequences of a late diagnosis.

A postchemoradiotherapy CEA level <5 ng/ml is a favorable prognostic factor for rectal cancer and is associated with increased rates of earlier disease staging and complete tumor regression. Postchemoradiotherapy CEA levels may be useful in decision making for patients who may be candidates for alterative treatment strategies.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) therapy may result in significant tumor regression in patients with rectal cancer. Patients who develop complete tumor regression have been managed by treatment strategies that are alternatives to standard total mesorectal excision. Therefore, assessment of tumor response with positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) after neoadjuvant treatment may offer relevant information for the selection of patients to receive alternative treatment strategies. METHODS: Patients with clinical T2 (cT2) through cT4NxM0 rectal adenocarcinoma were included prospectively. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of 54 grays of radiation and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Baseline PET/CT studies were obtained before CRT followed by PET/CT studies at 6 weeks and 12 weeks after the completion of CRT. Clinical assessment was performed at 12 weeks after CRT completion. PET/CT results were compared with clinical and pathologic data. RESULTS: In total, 99 patients were included in the study. Twenty-three patients were complete responders (16 had a complete clinical response, and 7 had a complete pathologic response). The PET/CT response evaluation at 12 weeks indicated that 18 patients had a complete response, and 81 patients had an incomplete response. There were 5 false-negative and 10 false-positive PET/CT results. PET/CT for the detection of residual cancer had 93% sensitivity, 53% specificity, a 73% negative predictive value, an 87% positive predictive value, and 85% accuracy. Clinical assessment alone resulted in an accuracy of 91%. PET/CT information may have detected misdiagnoses made by clinical assessment alone, improving overall accuracy to 96%. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of tumor response at 12 weeks after CRT completion with PET/ CT imaging may provide a useful additional tool with good overall accuracy for the selection of patients who may avoid unnecessary radical resection after achieving a complete clinical response.