490 likes | 709 Views
Anal cancer 2008. John Northover St Mark’s Hospital M62 course, 2008. The disease. Rare - 1% of bowel cancers First GI tumour to become ‘non-surgical’ II. Peak of development activity - 1990s. Viral aetiology and treatment. The development of therapy. Surgery alone Radiotherapy alone
E N D
Anal cancer2008 John Northover St Mark’s Hospital M62 course, 2008
The disease • Rare - 1% of bowel cancers • First GI tumour to become ‘non-surgical’ II
Peak of development activity - 1990s Viral aetiology and treatment
The development of therapy • Surgery alone • Radiotherapy alone • Combined modality therapy
Surgical results, St Mark’s Abdominoperineal excision: • Margin, 72 cases, 5YS = 55% • Canal, 123 cases, 5YS = 58% Pinna-Pintor et al, 1989
Radiotherapy results • 72 patients: • 67% 5 year survival • 75% anal function retained Papillon et al, 1985
The coming of combined therapy • Nigro began in 1974 • Three inoperable cases • Complete remissions
Optimum non-surgical therapy? RADIOTHERAPY ALONE or CHEMO plus RADIOTHERAPY
ACT I trial - patient entry Randomised 577 patients 331 surgeons, 162 radiotherapists
UKCCCR trial - side effects Radiotherapy alone Chemoradiotherapy 62% 65%
ACT I - Local treatment failure 111/285 125/283 P<0.001, RR=0.57 (0.45, 0.73)
ACT I - Deaths from anal cancer 77/285 105/283 P=0.02, RR=0.71 (0.53, 0.95)
ACT I - Disease at death RT CM Locoregional only 48 38 Distant ± LR 48 29 Other 7 4 TOTAL 105 77
Surgical salvage ACT I • 265/577 (46%) local failures • 143/265 (54%) radical surgery • 10/143 (7%) no cancer in specimen
Surgical salvage ACT I • 67/133 (50%) alive at 2.1 years • 58/133 (44%) further pelvic rec. • Perineal wound healing -median 2 m.
Surgical salvage ACT I - ARE 22/40 51/89 P>0.5 , RR=0.89 (0.54, 1.47)
Lessons from ACT I • CMT established • High local failure rate (33%) • Less distant spread with CMT • Surgical salvage disappointing
ACT II - the questions • Better primary chemotherapy? • 5FU + MMC • 5FU + CDDP • “Adjuvant” therapy?
Intra-epithelial neoplasia Normal AIN I AIN II AIN III
The main target AIN III
AIN - why does it matter? • Premalignant • Multifocal • High risk groups • Increasing incidence • Anal ca. incidence rising
Aetiology of AIN • HPV infection • Mainly types 16, 18, 32, 33 • Integrates into genome • Genetic instability
High risk groups • Immune deficiency • Pathological - HIV • Therapeutic - transplant recipients • MSM
Relative prevalence of AIN • ‘Normal’ haemorrhoidectomy: • 3 in 8153 specimens (0.04%) Lemarchand 2004 • HIV+ men: • 20 in 103 men (19.4%) Kreuter 2005 x500 INCIDENCE
± universal HPV infection (95%) • Majority have AIN (81%) • HAART does not protect Palefsky 2005
Risks in other groups MSW MSS WSN
Symptoms • None • Pruritus • Bleeding
Diagnosis of AIN III Corkscrew vessels (AIN III)
Risk of progression Nottingham study • 35 patients AIN III • FU 63m (14-120) • 28 immune competent - no Ca • 6 immune deficient - 3 (50%) Ca Scholefield et al 2005
Surveillance - in known cases? • AIN I/II • None in immune competent • 6-12m in immune deficient? • AIN III • 6-12m in all - or immune def. only?
Should there be screening? • High risk groups • MSM, HIV+ ?? • What marker lesion? • HPV type, AIN stage? • What tests? • Anoscopy, HPV type, histology? • What intervention?
Should there be screening? • x20 anal cancer in MSM • AIN highly prevalent • ? Natural history • ? Improved outcomes • Rx morbidity and recurrence CASE NOT MADE
Medical management Surgery: • may be difficult (cf cervix) • high recurrence rate Medical: • Imiquimod • Vaccination
Medical management Imiquimod • Introduced 1997 • Cytokine induction • Stimulates cellular immunity • Approved for anogenital warts • ? Role in neoplasia (VIN)
Surgical options • LE ± graft ± faecal diversion
Surgical options • LE ± graft ± faecal diversion • Recurrence rates • Surgical morbidity
Anal cancer2008 John Northover St Mark’s Hospital M62 course, 2008