Skip to main content
Log in

Update der S3-Leitlinie zum kolorektalen Karzinom

Update of the German S3 guideline on colorectal carcinoma

  • Topic
  • Published:
best practice onkologie Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Das kolorektale Karzinom ist trotz abnehmender Inzidenz bei Männern die dritthäufigste und bei Frauen die zweithäufigste Krebserkrankung. Seit 1998 existiert die Leitlinie „Kolorektales Karzinom“, die erste onkologische S3-Leitlinie in Deutschland. In der letzten Aktualisierung wurden die Abschnitte „Endoskopie: Durchführung und Polypenmanagement“, „adjuvante und neoadjuvante Therapie“ und „Therapeutisches Vorgehen bei Metastasierung und in der palliativen Situation“ überarbeitet. Beim Polypenmanagement wurden die Nachsorgeintervalle für Low-Risk-Adenome verlängert und bei serratierten Adenomen dem der traditionellen Adenome angepasst. Bei T1-Karzinomen wurde Budding als möglicher Bestandteil in die Risikostratifizierung aufgenommen. Bei unter 70-jährigen Patienten im Stadium III bleibt eine oxaliplatinhaltige Therapie Standard in der adjuvanten Chemotherapie. Eine kürzlich veröffentlichte Studie zeigt, dass in der Low-Risk-Situation (N1 und T2/3) eine Therapieverkürzung auf 3 Monate ähnliche Ergebnisse erreicht wie eine Therapie über 6 Monate bei deutlich geringerer Nebenwirkungsrate. Für die metastasierte Situation wurde ein Algorithmus erstellt, der u. a. Ausmaß der Metastasierung, Allgemeinzustand des Patienten und Tumorlokalisation berücksichtigt. Der molekularbiologischen Untersuchung kommt eine entscheidende Bedeutung zu.

Abstract

Although the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in Germany has decreased in recent years, it still remains the third most common cancer in men and the second most common cancer in women. In 1998, an evidence-based guideline for the management of CRC was established in Germany—the very first oncologic S3 guideline. During the last update, the sections “endoscopy and polyp management”, “adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment”, and “therapy in the metastasized patient or palliative situation” were updated. The polyp surveillance interval for low-risk adenomas was increased, the interval for serrated adenomas was recommended to be the same as for traditional adenomas. For T1 cancers, the factor “budding” was introduced as an optional factor for risk stratification. For stage III patients younger than 70 years, oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy remains standard. A study published recently shows that in the low-risk situation (N1 and T2/3), decreasing treatment duration to 3 months has similar efficacy as treatment for 6 months, with a significantly lower rate of side effects. For patients with metastases, an algorithm has been introduced that considers the extent of disease, the patient’s general condition, and tumor location. Molecular examinations nowadays play an important role in treatment decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Literatur

  1. Robert Koch-Institut, Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister (Hrsg) (2017) Krebs in Deutschland 2013/2014. Robert Koch-Institut, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brenner H, Schrotz-King P, Holleczek B, Katalinic A, Hoffmeister M (2016) Declining bowel cancer incidence and mortality in Germany—an analysis of time trends in the first ten years after the introduction of screening colonoscopy. Dtsch Arztebl 113:101–106

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schmiegel W, Buchberger B, Follmann M et al (2017) S3-Leitlinie Kolorektales Karzinom Version 2.0. Z Gastroenterol 55:1344–1498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Choi JY, Jung SA, Shim KN et al (2015) Meta-analysis of predictive clinicopathologic factors for lymph node metastasis in patients with early colorectal carcinoma. J Korean Med Sci 30:398–406

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Løberg M, Kalager M, Holme Ø et al (2014) Long-term colorectal-cancer mortality after adenoma removal. N Engl J Med 371:799–807

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Anderson JC, Baron JA, Ahnen DJ et al (2017) Factors associated with shorter colonoscopy surveillance intervals for patients with low-risk colorectal adenomas and effects on outcome. Gastroenterology 152:1933–1943

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Martinez ME, Baron JA, Lieberman DA et al (2009) A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology 136:832–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vemulapalli KC, Rex DK (2014) Risk of advanced lesions at first follow-up colonoscopy in high-risk groups as defined by the United Kingdom post-polypectomy surveillance guideline: data from a single U.S. center. Gastrointest Endosc 80:299–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Erichsen R, Baron JA, Hamilton-Dutoit SJ et al (2016) Increased risk of colorectal cancer development among patients with serrated polyps. Gastroenterology 15:895–902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Booth CMCM, Nanji S, Wei X et al (2016) Use and effectiveness of adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III colon cancer: a population-based study. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 14:47–56

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Grothey A, Sobrero AF, Shields AF et al (2018) Duration of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer. N Engl J Med 378:1177–1188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJ et al (2004) Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging—a meta-analysis. Radiology 232:773–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Puli SR, Bechtold ML, Reddy JB, Choudhary A, Antillon MR (2010) Can endoscopic ultrasound predict early rectal cancers that can be resected endoscopically? A meta-analysis and systematic review. Dig Dis Sci 55:1221–1229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Gijn W, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID et al (2011) Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomized controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol 12:575–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rödel C, Graeven U, Fietkau R et al (2015) Oxaliplatin added to fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer (the German CAO/ARO/AIO-04 study): final results of the multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 16:979–989

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Renehan AG, Malcomson L, Emsley R et al (2016) Watch-and-wait approach versus surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy for patients with rectal cancer (the OnCoRe project): a propensity-score matched cohort analysis. Lancet Oncol 17:174–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hong YS, Nam BH, Kim KP et al (2014) Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (ADORE): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 15:1245–1253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Arnold D, Lueza B, Douillard JY et al (2017) Prognostic and predictive value of primary tumour side in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and EGFR directed antibodies in six randomized trials. Ann Oncol 28:1713–1729

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Adam R, Wicherts DA, de Haas RJ et al (2009) Patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases: is there a possibility of cure? J Clin Oncol 27:1829–1835

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Overman MJ, McDermott R, Leach JL et al (2017) Nivolumab in patients with metastatic DNA mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer (CheckMate 142): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 18:1182–1191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Overman MJ, Lonardi S, Wong KYM et al (2018) Durable clinical benefit with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in DNA Mismatch Repair-Deficient/Microsatellite Instability-High metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 36:773–779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sartore-Binachi A, Trusolino L, Martino C et al (2016) Dual-targeted therapy with trastuzumab and lapatinib in treatment-refractory, KRAS codon 12/13 wild-type, HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer (HERACLES): a proof-of-concept, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 17:738–746

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Pox.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

Referentenhonorare von den Firmen Falk, Hitachi, Immundiagnostik und Roche.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pox, C. Update der S3-Leitlinie zum kolorektalen Karzinom. best practice onkologie 13, 254–262 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11654-018-0093-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11654-018-0093-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation