Keywords
colonic-type adenocarcinoma - mucinous adenocarcinoma - goblet cell adenocarcinoma
- neuroendocrine carcinoma
Primary cancers of the appendix are rare, with an incidence of approximately 1.2 cases
per 100,000 people per year in the United States.[1] There are no established risk factors for the development of appendix cancer. Malignant
appendix tumors most often present with acute appendicitis and are diagnosed incidentally
at histologic assessment of the surgical specimen. Appendix cancers may also be asymptomatic
and be found incidentally as an abnormal-appearing appendiceal orifice on colonoscopy,
at surgery, or on cross-sectional imaging for other indications, such as presumed
ovarian malignancy. When symptoms are present, the disease process is often advanced.
For example, many patients present with abdominal distention and pain secondary to
peritoneal dissemination of appendix cancer.
For such a small organ, the appendix gives rise to surprisingly diverse morphologic
tumor types. The differential diagnosis of primary appendix cancer includes adenocarcinoma,
neuroendocrine carcinoma, and mixed tumors containing both of these elements with
goblet cells. There is tremendous histologic and biologic heterogeneity within these
broad categories, with tumors ranging from low to high grade, with or without signet
ring cells. Given this morphologic diversity, classification of appendiceal tumors
has historically been confusing. For the purposes of this review, appendix cancers
will be broadly classified as: colonic-type adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma,
goblet cell adenocarcinoma (GCA), and neuroendocrine carcinoma (aka. “typical carcinoid”).
Colonic-Type Adenocarcinoma
Colonic-Type Adenocarcinoma
Background and Epidemiology
Overall, adenocarcinoma is thought to be the most common type of primary appendix
cancer, comprising 60% of all cases.[1] Nevertheless, it constitutes less than 0.5% of all gastrointestinal tract neoplasms.[1]
[2] Primary appendix adenocarcinoma is classified as “colonic-type,” which arises from
preexisting adenomas similar to colorectal tumors, or “mucinous,” which is biologically
and histologically distinct from colonic adenocarcinoma.[3] Similar to colon cancer, colonic-type adenocarcinoma of the appendix presents at
a mean age of 62 to 65 years, with a slight male sex predominance.[1]
[4] Given the rarity of this disease, there is no designated American Joint Commission
on Cancer (AJCC) staging system or National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) evidence-based
guideline specific for it. The workup, staging, and treatment of colonic-type adenocarcinoma
arising in the appendix mirror that of colon cancer.
Presentation and Workup
Patients with colonic-type adenocarcinoma of the appendix most often present with
incidentally identified lesions following appendectomy for appendicitis or other indication,
and will have pathologic T-stage information immediately available. Tis tumors resected
with negative margins can be managed with appendectomy alone. T1 tumors with favorable
characteristics are thought of like malignant polyps. Appendectomy alone may be sufficient
if these lesions are grade 1 or 2, have no angiolymphatic invasion, and have negative
resection margins. All patients should undergo complete colonoscopy to evaluate for
synchronous colorectal lesions.
Management
Patients found to have unfavorable T1 tumors (high-grade, angiolymphatic invasion,
and/or positive margins) should be considered for formal right hemicolectomy for adequate
staging and resection. Patients with T2 or greater tumors require complete staging
with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis
if not already performed. If there is no evidence of distant metastasis, right hemicolectomy
is recommended, with 12 or more lymph nodes typically considered adequate for accurate
staging. In the largest population-based study of primary appendix cancer, the rate
of lymph node involvement in the colonic-type adenocarcinoma subtype was 30%.[1] Patients with node-positive disease (stage III) warrant adjuvant systemic chemotherapy
with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin or capecitabine with oxaliplatin if medically fit.
As for colon-primary adenocarcinoma, adjuvant chemotherapy should also be considered
for stage II patients with high-risk features, especially younger patients and those
with inadequate nodal staging.
The rate of distant metastasis at presentation for colonic-type adenocarcinoma of
the appendix is not well known given the rarity of the disease, but has been reported
at 23 to 37%.[1]
[4] The peritoneum (including ovaries) is the most common site, and the liver and lung
metastases are less common. Systemic chemotherapy is the recommended treatment for
asymptomatic patients who present with distant metastasis. For patients with peritoneal-only
metastatic disease, complete cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy
should be considered if complete tumor debulking can be achieved. Cytoreduction and
IP chemotherapy are discussed in detail in the next section on mucinous adenocarcinoma
in which isolated peritoneal metastasis is more common. As is true for colorectal
cancer, surgical resection, including metastasectomy of limited liver or lung lesions,
is reasonable for select patients with appendix adenocarcinoma.
Mucinous Adenocarcinoma
Background and Epidemiology
Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the appendix (MAA) appears to be a biologically and histologically
distinct entity from colorectal cancer and from colonic-type adenocarcinoma of the
appendix. The mean age at presentation is 60 years and there is no clear sex predilection.[1]
[4] There are no known risk factors for this disease. MAA is broadly classified histologically
as low or high grade, and this distinction is greatly important for determining prognosis
and treatment. The 7th edition of AJCC staging system for MAA is shown in [Table 1].
Table 1
AJCC staging (7th edition) of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the appendix
T stage
|
|
Stage
|
|
Tx
|
Primary tumor cannot be assessed
|
0
|
Tis, N0, M0
|
Tis
|
Carcinoma in situ
|
I
|
T1/2, N0, M0
|
T1
|
Invades submucosa
|
IIA
|
T3, N0, M0
|
T2
|
Invades muscularis propria
|
IIB
|
T4a, N0, M0
|
T3
|
Invades through muscularis propria
|
IIC
|
T4b, N0, M0
|
T4a
|
Invades visceral peritoneum
|
IIIA
|
T1/2, N1, M0
|
T4b
|
Invades adjacent organs
|
IIIB
|
T3/4, N1, M0
|
Nodes
|
|
IIIC
|
Any T, N2, M0
|
N0
|
No regional lymph node involvement
|
IVA
|
Any T, N0, MIa, G1
|
N1
|
Metastasis to 1–3 regional nodes
|
IVB
|
Any T, N0, MIa, G2/3
|
N2
|
Metastasis to ≥ 4 regional nodes
|
|
Any T, N1/2, MIa, any G
|
Metastasis
|
|
IVC
|
Any T, any N, MIb, any G
|
M0
|
No distant metastasis
|
|
|
M1a
|
Intraperitoneal-only metastasis
|
|
|
M1b
|
Extraperitoneal distant metastasis
|
|
|
Grade
|
|
|
|
GX
|
Cannot be determined
|
|
|
G1
|
Well-differentiated
|
|
|
G2
|
Moderately differentiated
|
|
|
G3
|
Poorly differentiated
|
|
|
G4
|
Undifferentiated
|
|
|
Abbreviation: AJCC, American Joint Commission on Cancer.
Presentation and Workup
Patients with MAA most often present after rupture of the primary tumor with spread
of mucin and tumor cells throughout the peritoneal cavity. The resulting clinical
syndrome of abdominal distention secondary to mucinous ascites is known as pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) and is usually diagnosed at operation for appendicitis, peritonitis, or presumed
ovarian malignancy, or on cross-sectional imaging. MAA tends to remain inside of the
peritoneal cavity with extraperitoneal (including lymphatic) metastasis seen only
in rare cases. For this reason, peritoneal disease may be considered a regional, rather
than distant, metastatic site.
Low-grade MAA (G1) and low grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) are characterized
by well-differentiated, glandular, mucin-producing cells. Despite being classically
described as “noninvasive” histologically, these cells still lead to PMP and are considered
malignant. Unlike LAMN, low-grade MAA may exhibit gross invasion of involved organs,
as evident by the gross photo of a distal gastrectomy specimen removed during cytoreduction
for low-grade MAA in [Fig. 1A]. This image shows densely adherent tumor deposits that could not be separated from
the stomach, but that still appeared low-grade on the microscopic level. However,
low-grade MAA tends to be indolent and slowly progressive. Patients may have considerable
disease burden but may live for many years with minimal symptoms. [Fig. 1B] demonstrates a cross-sectional image from this same patient who had been living
with slowly progressive disease over the course of 5 years since her initial diagnosis
with minimal symptoms. A three-tiered grading system for MAA has been proposed that
accounts for adverse features such as destructive invasion, angiolymphatic invasion,
high cellularity, perineural invasion, and signet ring cell component in addition
to cytologic grade.[5] While this system has not yet been widely adopted, it may prove to better stratify
those patients with purely noninvasive disease from those with more intermediate,
indolent but invasive disease like the patient described here.
Fig. 1 (A) Gross photograph of distal gastrectomy specimen involved by low-grade MAA. Despite
being low-grade, the tumor exhibited gross tissue invasion. (B) CT scan from the same patient demonstrating extensive low-grade MAA that was minimally
symptomatic.
High-grade MAA is characterized by invasive adenocarcinoma cells that may or may not
have a signet ring cell component. High-grade MAA exhibits a much more aggressive
clinical course than low-grade. Patients are more often symptomatic at presentation
with complaints such as unintentional weight loss, pain, bloating, and bowel obstruction.
In both low- and high-grade MAA, assessment of extent of disease is the first step
in the workup when patients present with peritoneal dissemination. The peritoneal
carcinomatosis index (PCI) described by Jacquet and Sugarbaker is the most commonly
used metric for assessment of disease burden ([Fig. 2]).[6] PCI can be estimated preoperatively by contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging
with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, small
peritoneal deposits are difficult to appreciate on CT and in some cases it can be
difficult to distinguish between mucin and tumor. There is some evidence suggesting
that diffusion-weighted MRI may be superior to CT in evaluating extent of peritoneal
disease.[7] Nevertheless, both MRI and CT are acceptable for preoperative assessment of disease
burden.
Fig. 2 Peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI). PCI is determined by assigning a LSS to each
of the 13 peritoneal regions and summing the scores. LSS, lesion size score. The maximum
possible score is 39. (Reprinted with permission from Kelly KJ, Nash GM. Peritoneal
debulking/intraperitoneal chemotherapy—Non-sarcoma. J Surg Oncol 2014;109:14–22.)
If the estimated preoperative PCI is greater than 20, in the presence of high-grade
histology, complete surgical resection is more challenging. Additional findings that
predict the ability to perform a complete surgical resection include extensive small
bowel involvement, evident by diffuse thickening and hyperenhancement of the bowel
wall, small bowel obstruction, hydronephrosis or ureteral obstruction, and extensive
upper abdominal disease with encasement or deformity of vital structures such as the
porta hepatis or inferior vena cava. Last, extraperitoneal metastatic disease to liver
parenchyma, retroperitoneal lymph nodes, or other sites is considered by many to be
a contraindication to curative-intent surgery.
Management
Management of MAA is dependent on the histologic type and the extent of disease at
presentation, and is outlined in [Fig. 3]. For those fortunate patients with MAA that has not ruptured, complete surgical
resection with appendectomy without spillage of mucin is recommended. [Fig. 4] illustrates a CT scan from a patient like this with a large, mucin-filled, and chronically
dilated but nonruptured appendix. Regardless of size, it is important to remove the
appendix/cyst en bloc without spillage of mucin into the peritoneal cavity. For small
lesions, this may be feasible to do laparoscopically, but for large lesions as illustrated
in the figure, and open approach should be considered. For localized, nonruptured,
low-grade MAA, appendectomy with en bloc resection of the cystic lesion is likely
curative. If pathology demonstrates high-grade disease that is T2 or greater, right
hemicolectomy is typically recommended due to the higher risk of lymph node involvement.
Fig. 3 Algorithm for management of mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma. HIPEC, hyperthermic
intraperitoneal chemotherapy.
Fig. 4 CT scan demonstrating a large cystic lesion in a patient who presented with vague
abdominal pain and increasing abdominal girth. This “cyst” was actually the patient's
chronically dilated, mucin filled appendix which had not ruptured.
In cases where peritoneal dissemination has occurred, whether gross or microscopic,
regional metastasis is present and regional therapy is indicated. The optimal therapy
is complete surgical cytoreduction (defined as removal of all gross disease or reduction
of tumor deposits to ≤ 2.5 mm in thickness) in combination with IP chemotherapy. Cytoreduction
routinely involves complete omentectomy and right lower quadrant peritonectomy. Bilateral
oophorectomy is also recommended, especially in postmenopausal women, as the ovaries
are a frequent site of metastasis and recurrence if not removed. Women of childbearing
age, in the absence of gross disease, may elect for preservation of the ovaries. If
they do so, close follow-up with pelvic ultrasound in addition to standard cross-sectional
imaging will allow for discrimination of benign and potentially malignant cystic lesions
on the ovaries. Regardless of whether oophorectomy is performed, women of childbearing
age undergoing cytoreduction and HIPEC should be preoperatively counseled regarding
fertility preservation options, such as ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval.
IP chemotherapy is often administered in the form of intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal
chemotherapy (HIPEC), which is given as a single dose at the time of cytoreduction.
Recently, the American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancy (ASPSM) agreed upon
a standardized delivery method of IP chemotherapy for colorectal cancer with peritoneal
dissemination, and this is the regimen used at most centers for appendiceal primary
tumors as well.[8] The consensus method is HIPEC delivered intraoperatively at the time of cytoreduction
using a closed technique. The recommended agent is Mitomycin C (MMC) at a dose of
40 mg in 3 L of perfusate. The perfusion is performed at an inflow temperature of
42°C and is continued for 90 minutes (30 mg of drug for first 60 minutes with additional
10 mg added for last 30 minutes). Another option is early postoperative intraperitoneal
chemotherapy (EPIC), which is administered in several doses during the first 1 to
7 days postoperatively, under normothermic conditions via an implanted subcutaneous
port. Agents most commonly used are floxuridine, MMC, or 5-fluorouracil.[9] No studies have shown one method to be superior to the other, but there is a randomized
trial currently underway comparing the two techniques (NCT01815359).
For the patients whose diagnosis was made at appendectomy with pathology showing evidence
of rupture or tumor cells outside of the appendix, cross-sectional imaging may not
demonstrate any residual disease (PCI 0). In these cases, assessment of disease burden
is best done by laparoscopy. If there is no gross tumor or mucin identified and pathology
showed low-grade MAA, surveillance with examination and cross-sectional imaging is
recommended. In this setting, IP chemotherapy is generally reserved for development
of recurrent gross disease. There is a possibility that patients may not develop recurrent
disease, so it is not necessary to expose patients to laparotomy, adhesion formation,
and potential complications of IP chemotherapy in this setting.
For high-grade tumors with perforation and tumor cells outside of the appendix, laparoscopy
or laparotomy with assessment for residual disease is warranted regardless of imaging
findings. Complete cytoreduction of any gross residual tumor or mucin should be performed.
This typically includes omentectomy and right lower quadrant peritonectomy, and may
also include bowel resection, splenectomy, cholecystectomy, and salpingo-oophorectomy.
Most specialists recommend administration of IP chemotherapy. At the time of cytoreduction,
right hemicolectomy is used sparingly for low-grade MAA as lymph node metastasis is
rare (6% of cases).[10] In high-grade disease, nodal metastases are present in up to 20% of cases, so right
hemicolectomy is a consideration; however, therapeutic benefit has not been demonstrated.[10]
The majority of patients with MAA present with more extensive, disseminated disease.
In cases where cross-sectional imaging demonstrates potentially resectable disease,
laparoscopy is a useful adjunct to confirm eligibility for complete cytoreduction
and to obtain tissue for histologic assessment if grade is not known. In patients
with known low-grade disease, laparoscopy is not as important as there is a role for
palliative debulking, even if complete cytoreduction cannot be achieved. Staged cytoreduction
and HIPEC is also an option for patients with low-grade MAA where complete cytoreduction
is technically possible, but cannot be completed safely in one operation due to prolonged
operative time. In this setting, clearance of either the upper or lower abdomen is
done at the time of the first operation. Patients are allowed to recover for 3 to
4 months, and then completion debulking of residual disease and IPC may be performed
at a second operation.
For patients not eligible for complete cytoreduction, systemic chemotherapy with regimens
utilized for metastatic colorectal cancer is the best initial therapy. Patients should
undergo repeat imaging at intervals of 2 to 3 months to evaluate response to therapy.
In some cases, patients will have a measurable response to therapy and become candidates
for cytoreduction and IPC.
Even after complete cytoreduction and IPC, recurrence of MAA is common, in both low-
and high-grade disease. In a recently published large series of patients, median disease-free
survival was 38.1 months for patients with low-grade MAA and 21.6 months for high-grade
disease.[10] Similarly, median overall survival at 5 years is on the order of 75 to 81% for low-grade
MAA and 45 to 65% for high-grade disease.[11]
[12]
[13]
[14] Low-grade MAA is not typically responsive to systemic therapy, so adjuvant treatment
is uncommonly recommended.[15] If recurrence develops, it is most often within the peritoneal cavity and is typically
indolent and slow-growing. Repeat debulking or complete cytoreduction/IPC are reasonable
and have been reported result in long-term survival. Evidence suggests there is some
improvement in progression-free survival with systemic chemotherapy for high-grade
disease, although response rates are lower than hoped.[15]
Goblet Cell Adenocarcinoma
Goblet Cell Adenocarcinoma
Background and Epidemiology
Goblet cell adenocarcinoma (GCA), also commonly referred to as “goblet cell carcinoid,”
is a rare tumor type accounting for approximately 14 to 19% of primary appendix cancers.[1]
[16] GCA is a mixed tumor, containing both epithelial and neuroendocrine elements, and
is characterized by the presence of intestinal-type goblet cells. Recent studies have
shown that GCAs are actually closer to adenocarcinoma than neuroendocrine carcinoma
in terms of both immunohistochemical profile and biologic behavior.[10]
[17]
[18] The mean patient age at presentation of GCA is 52 years and there is no sex predilection.[19] There are no established risk factors, although GCA has been associated with schistosomiasis
in reports from China.[20]
[21]
Presentation and Workup
[Fig. 5] demonstrates a CT scan of a patient who presented with clinical findings of acute
appendicitis. This is the most common presentation of GCA, occurring in up to 60%
of cases. The tip of the appendix was dilated at 1.2 cm and was enhancing as shown
in the figure. This finding was not specific for a mass, however, especially in the
setting of periappendiceal fat stranding and inflammation. The patient underwent a
laparoscopic appendectomy and was found to have a GCA.
Fig. 5 CT scan demonstrating acute appendicitis. The tip of the appendix was somewhat enlarged
and hyperenhancing. Final pathology revealed a 1.5-cm goblet cell adenocarcinoma.
Once the diagnosis of GCA is established, CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis
is recommended for staging. Positron emission tomography (PET) has not been validated
in this disease. The percentage of patients with stage IV disease at presentation
varies considerably in different series but is thought to be greater than 50%; the
peritoneum is the most common site. If tumor markers are to be analyzed for potential
utility in postoperative surveillance, CEA, CA 19–9, and CA-125, rather than chromogranin
A (CgA), are recommended.[19]
Management
In cases of localized, primary appendiceal GCA, lymph node involvement is present
in 20 to 40% of cases, so right hemicolectomy is recommended for adequate treatment
and staging regardless of primary tumor size.[16]
[17]
[19] As for colorectal adenocarcinoma, examination of at least 12 lymph nodes allows
for optimal staging. If lymph node involvement is present, adjuvant systemic therapy
with a 5-fluorouracil–based regimen is recommended for 6 months.
For GCA patients presenting with peritoneal-only metastatic disease, evidence suggests
there is a role for cytoreduction and IPC. In a recent report of 45 patients with
peritoneal-only metastasis of GCA undergoing evaluation for cytoreduction and HIPEC,
complete cytoreduction was achieved in 71% of cases and HIPEC (with MMC or oxaliplatin)
was administered in 80%.[10] Lymph node metastases were present in 52% of patients. For those patients who received
complete cytoreduction and HIPEC, the estimated disease-free and overall survival
rates at 3 years were 43% and 63%, respectively.
Neuroendocrine Carcinoma
Background and Epidemiology
Primary appendiceal neuroendocrine carcinoma (ANC), classically referred to as “appendiceal
carcinoid,” is considered a subtype of midgut neuroendocrine carcinoma, which can
arise in the jejunum/ileum, the appendix, or the cecum. These tumors arise from enterochromaffin-like
cells in the bowel wall and often produce serotonin. The published annual incidence
of ANC is approximately 0.16 cases per 100,000 people, but is likely underestimated
as these tumors are often considered “benign” and are not included in cancer registries.
The true incidence is unknown. Existing data suggest that ANCs exhibit a slight female
sex predominance, and are more common in Caucasians and African Americans than in
people of Asian/Pacific Island descent.[22] The mean patient age at diagnosis is 38 to 48 years.[1]
[4]
Presentation and Workup
As for other appendiceal primary cancers, ANCs are most often diagnosed following
appendectomy for appendicitis. In some cases, however, patients may report vague symptoms
of nonspecific abdominal pain, bloating, and diarrhea. In exceedingly rare cases of
advanced disease with distant metastasis, the most common site is the liver. These
patients may present with carcinoid syndrome due to systemic effects of serotonin
produced by the liver lesions. This is characterized by episodic flushing and diarrhea.
ANCs are classified by location within the appendix, size, and histologic features.
The AJCC staging system for ANCs is shown in [Table 2A], but it is of limited value because it is based only on size and does not account
for tumor grade or other histologic features that are known to be important. Midgut
neuroendocrine tumors are graded based on number of mitoses visualized on microscopy
and on Ki-67 proliferation index. Low-grade tumors (G1) are defined as having fewer than two
mitoses per 10 high-power fields (HPF) and Ki-67 index less than 3%. Intermediate-grade tumors (G2) have 2 to 20 mitoses per 10
HPF or Ki-67 index of 3 to 20%. High-grade tumors (G3) have more than 20 mitoses per 10 HPF
or Ki-67 index greater than 20%.[23] The staging system adopted by the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS)
([Table 2B]) accounts for tumor grade.[19] In most cases, G1 and G2 tumors are well-differentiated, and G3 tumors are poorly
differentiated and are the equivalent of “small- or large-cell” neuroendocrine carcinoma
depending on the appearance and size of the cells. Most ANCs are well-differentiated,
G1 or G2 tumors, and 70 to 80% are located at the tip of the appendix.[19]
Table 2
(A) AJCC and (B) ENETS staging systems for primary appendiceal neuroendocrine carcinoma
A. AJCC
|
B. ENETS
|
Tumor
|
|
–
|
–
|
TX
|
Primary tumor cannot be assessed
|
–
|
–
|
T0
|
No evidence of primary tumor
|
T1a
|
≤ 1 cm greatest diameter
|
T1
|
≤ 1 cm greatest diameter, invasion to submucosa or muscularis propria
|
T1b
|
1–2 cm greatest diameter
|
–
|
T2
|
> 2 cm but ≤ 4 cm or invasion of cecum
|
T2
|
≤ 2 cm invades submucosa, muscularis propria, and/or ≤ 3 mm of subserosa or mesoappendix
|
T3
|
> 4 cm or extension to ileum
|
T3
|
> 2 cm and/or > 3 mm invasion of subserosa or mesoappendix
|
T4
|
Perforates peritoneum or invades other organs
|
Nodes
|
|
–
|
–
|
NX
|
Nodes cannot be assessed
|
N0
|
No regional lymph node involvement
|
N1
|
Metastasis to regional nodes
|
Metastasis
|
|
–
|
–
|
MX
|
Distant metastasis not assessed
|
M0
|
No distant metastasis
|
M1
|
Distant metastasis
|
Stage
|
|
–
|
–
|
0
|
Tis, N0, M0
|
I
|
T1, N0, M0
|
I
|
T1, N0, M0
|
II
|
T2/3, N0, M0
|
IIA
|
T2, N0, M0
|
III
|
T4, N0, M0
|
IIB
|
T3, N0,M0
|
|
Any T, N1, M0
|
IIIA
|
T4, N0, M0
|
IV
|
Any T, any N, M1
|
IIIB
|
Any T, N1, M0
|
I
|
T1, N0, M0
|
IV
|
Any T, any N, M1
|
Abbreviations: AJCC, American Joint Commission on Cancer; ENETS, European Neuroendocrine
Tumor Society.
Management
In cases of subcentimeter, G1 ANCs diagnosed on retrospective analysis of an appendectomy
specimen as occurs in most cases, appendectomy with negative margins is considered
curative and no further staging or postoperative surveillance is necessary.[19]
[23]
[24] Overall survival is essentially 100% in this group of patients.
Recommendations are less clear in patients with tumors sized greater than 1 cm but
less than 2 cm, and in those less than 1cm with positive margins or other high-risk
features. High-risk features include high mitotic rate or proliferative index (G2/3),
positive surgical margin, location at the base of the appendix, invasion of the mesoappendix
greater than 3 mm, and lymphovascular invasion. If any of these features are present
in tumors sized less than 2 cm, patients should be counseled about a poorly characterized
but possibly increased risk of recurrence. Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy should
be considered for completion resection and appropriate staging, especially for young
patients and those without comorbidities in whom the operation would be lower risk.
Alternatively, cross-sectional imaging can be considered as means of assessing for
locoregional and distant metastasis if patients do not wish to undergo a staging surgical
procedure.
For ANCs greater than 2 cm in diameter, the risk of metastasis is on the order of
25 to 40%, so right hemicolectomy is recommended.[19]
[25]
[26] In the absence of lymph node involvement, even if the primary tumor was sized greater
than 2 cm, it is unclear whether specific follow-up or surveillance imaging is necessary.
For cases with nodal or other resected locoregional or distant metastasis, however,
long-term follow-up is advised.
For the exceedingly rare cases of ANC with distant metastases at presentation, consideration
for surgical treatment is reasonable if the metastatic lesion or lesions are limited
and are resectable. This is a slow-growing, indolent tumor type so metastasectomy
may provide benefit in terms of disease free and possibly overall survival, although
this has not been definitively shown. For extensive, unresectable liver metastases
or patients who are not fit for surgery, somatostatin analogues have been shown to
improve progression-free survival for midgut neuroendocrine carcinomas.[27] CgA can be monitored to assess for response along with interval imaging. Alternative
systemic treatment options include peptide receptor radionuclide therapy and Everolimus.[19]
[23]
Summary and Surveillance Recommendations
Summary and Surveillance Recommendations
In summary, primary cancers of the appendix are histologically diverse. Classification
of these tumors has historically been confusing due to nonstandardized nomenclature,
but they can be broadly classified as colonic-type or mucinous adenocarcinoma, GCA,
or ANC. Appendectomy alone may be adequate therapy for early-stage tumors in all subtypes
except GCA. For GCA and locally advanced adenocarcinoma or ANC, completion staging
is considered, followed by right hemicolectomy, cytoreductive surgery and IPC, or
definitive systemic chemotherapy as indicated.
After curative-intent treatment, patients with GCA, T2 or greater colonic-type adenocarcinoma,
mucinous adenocarcinoma with peritoneal dissemination, and ANC with lymph node involvement
or size greater than 2 cm should be followed with history and physical and cross-sectional
imaging. Given the rarity of primary appendiceal cancer and the lack of established
practice guidelines, patients with advanced disease should be treated at specialized
centers with a multidisciplinary team approach.