HHS Public Access

Author manuscript
Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as:

Dis Colon Rectum. 2021 May ; 64(5): 545–554. doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000001914.

Is Microsatellite Status Associated With Prognosis In Stage II

Colon Cancer With High-Risk Features?
Paul M. Cavallaro, M.D., Caitlin Stafford, B.S., Christy Cauley, M.D., David Berger, M.D.,
Liliana Bordeianou, M.D., M.P.H., Hiroko Kunitake, M.D., Todd Francone, M.D., Rocco
Ricciardi, M.D., M.P.H.
Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Author Manuscript

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The influence of microsatellite instability on prognosis in high-risk stage II
colon cancer is unknown.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between microsatellite instability and overall

survival in high-risk stage II colon cancer.

DESIGN: Retrospective review of the National Cancer Database from 2010-2016

SETTINGS: This study included national cancer epidemiology data from the American College
of Surgeons Commission on Cancer.

PATIENTS: 16,788 patients with stage II colon adenocarcinoma and known microsatellite status
Author Manuscript

(1,709 microsatellite unstable)

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival

RESULTS: Microsatellite unstable cancers with high-risk features had significantly better overall
survival than microsatellite stable cancers with high-risk features (5-year survival 80% vs 72%,
p=0.01), and had equivalent survival to microsatellite stable cancers with low risk features (5-year
survival 80%). When stratifying by specific high-risk features, patients with lymphovascular
invasion, perineural invasion, or high-grade histology had similar overall survival to patients
without these features, only in microsatellite unstable cancers. However, patients with high-risk
features of T4 stage, positive margins, and <12 lymph nodes saw no survival benefit based on
microsatellite status. This was confirmed on multivariable cox regression modeling. A subgroup
analysis of patients who did not receive chemotherapy similarly demonstrated that microsatellite
Author Manuscript

unstable cancers with lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, or high-grade histology had
similar overall survival to microsatellite unstable cancers without those features.

LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by lack of specific clinical data and potential treatment bias.

Correspondence: Paul Cavallaro, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St. GRB-425 Boston, MA 02114.
pcavallaro@mgh.harvard.edu. Twitter: @paulcavallaro5.
Financial Disclosures: None reported.
Selected for plenary presentation (Abstract #132), Plenary Session Podium Presentation III, Neoplasia; 2020 Annual Meeting of the
American Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons, June 6-10, Boston, MA.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 2

CONCLUSIONS: In microsatellite unstable cancers, lymphovascular invasion, perineural

Author Manuscript

invasion, and high-grade histology are not associated with worse overall survival, even when
deferring adjuvant chemotherapy. These data support National Comprehensive Cancer Network
recommendations to forego chemotherapy in stage II cancers with microsatellite instability and
these features. In contrast, some high-risk features were associated with worse survival despite
microsatellite unstable biology, and therapies to improve survival need to be explored.
Abstract
Se desconoce la influencia de la inestabilidad microsatélite en el pronóstico del cáncer de colon en
estadio II de alto riesgo.
Investigar la relación entre la inestabilidad microsatélite y la supervivencia general en el cáncer de
colon en estadio II de alto riesgo.

Revisión retrospectiva de la base de datos nacional del cáncer de 2010 a 2016

Author Manuscript

Este estudio incluyó datos nacionales de epidemiología del cáncer de la Comisión de Cáncer del
Colegio Americano de Cirujanos.

16,788 pacientes con adenocarcinoma de colon en estadio II y estado microsatélite conocido

(1,709 microsatélite inestables)

Supervivencia global

Los cánceres microsatélite inestables con características de alto riesgo tuvieron una supervivencia
general significativamente mejor que los cánceres microsatélite estables con características de alto
riesgo (supervivencia a 5 años 80% vs 72%, p = 0.01), y tuvieron una supervivencia equivalente a
los cánceres microsatélite estables con características de bajo riesgo (supervivencia a 5 años 80%).
Al estratificar por características específicas de alto riesgo, los pacientes con invasión
linfovascular, invasión perineural o histología de alto grado tuvieron una supervivencia general
Author Manuscript

similar a la de los pacientes sin estas características, solo en cánceres microsatélite inestables. Sin
embargo, los pacientes con características de alto riesgo en estadio T4, márgenes positivos y <12
ganglios linfáticos no tuvieron ningún beneficio de supervivencia basado en el estado de
microsatélites. Esto se confirmó en un modelo de regresión de Cox multivariable. Un análisis de
subgrupos de pacientes que no recibieron quimioterapia demostró de manera similar que los
cánceres microsatélite inestables con invasión linfovascular, invasión perineural o histología de
alto grado tenían una supervivencia general similar a los cánceres microsatélite inestables sin esas
características.

El estudio está limitado por la falta de datos clínicos específicos y el posible sesgo de tratamiento.

En los cánceres microsatélite inestables, la invasión linfovascular, la invasión perineural y la

histología de alto grado no se asocian con una peor sobrevida general, incluso cuando se aplaza la
Author Manuscript

quimioterapia adyuvante. Estos datos respaldan las recomendaciones de la National

Comprehensive Cancer Network de omitir la quimioterapia en los cánceres en estadio II con
inestabilidad microsatélite y estas características. Por el contrario, algunas características de alto
riesgo se asociaron con una peor supervivencia a pesar de la biología microsatélite inestable, y es
necesario considerar las terapias para mejorar la supervivencia.

Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/Bxxx. (Traducción—Dr. Jorge Silva

Velazco)

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 3

Keywords
Author Manuscript

Colon cancer; High-risk stage II; Microsatellite instability; Overall survival

INTRODUCTION
The positive prognostic value of microsatellite instability (MSI) status in early-stage colon
cancer has been widely reported in the literature. Specifically, in stage II colon cancer
patients, MSI-high (MSI-H) cancers have been shown to have more favorable local
recurrence rates and overall survival (OS) compared to microsatellite stable (MSS) or MSI-
low (MSI-L) cancers.1-4 In addition to MSI status, there are a variety of other
clinicopathologic factors that are considered to be high-risk features that may potentially
impact prognosis. These high-risk features are often cited as indications for adjuvant
Author Manuscript

chemotherapy in patients with stage II colon cancer and include: T4 stage, high-grade
histology, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion (PNI), bowel obstruction or
perforation, inadequate lymph node sampling, and close/undetermined/positive margins.5-7

Importantly, the interaction between MSI-H status and high-risk features in stage II colon
cancer has not been studied and remains unclear. This relationship is of potential relevance
for clinical decision making, as the most recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network
(NCCN) guidelines recommend adjuvant chemotherapy for all stage II colon cancers with
high-risk features, unless those cancers are also MSI-H.8 Meta-analyses have demonstrated
the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk stage II colon cancer,9,10 however there
are little data to confirm that MSI-H cancers with high-risk features have similar prognosis
to MSI-H or MSS cancers without high-risk features. The NCCN recommendation to forego
adjuvant chemotherapy in MSI-H cancers is primarily based on literature demonstrating that
Author Manuscript

MSI-H cancers do not respond to 5-fluorouracil based adjuvant chemotherapy.11-13

Furthermore, population-level data have shown that not all high-risk features have similar
adverse effects on OS, with T4 stage carrying significant risk and LVI, PNI, and high-grade
histology potentially carrying negligible risk when adjusting for other variables.14
Ultimately, there is a lack of data to guide oncologic practice in early stage colon cancer
patients with MSI-H cancers and high-risk features.

Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to describe the association between MSI status
and prognosis in stage II colon cancer when considering high-risk features, and as a
corollary, determine how specific high-risk features relate to survival in patients with MSI-H
cancers. The secondary aim was to describe OS in the subgroup of patients with MSI-H
cancers that did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy, when stratified by high-risk features.
Author Manuscript

METHODS
Data Source
We selected patients from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) 2016 Participant User
File.15 The NCDB is a national hospital-based cancer registry which captures approximately
70% of adult cancer patients in the United States (US) from over 1500 Commission on

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 4

Cancer-accredited hospitals. It contains information on patient demographics, disease stage,

Author Manuscript

comorbidity, and cancer treatment course. Our study was considered exempt by the
Institutional Review Board.

Patient Selection
We included patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pathologic stage II
primary colon adenocarcinoma (C18.0, C18.2-C18.9, C19.9) treated with a definitive
surgical resection from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015 and with follow up until
12/2016. Adenocarcinoma was defined using International Statistical Classification of
Diseases (ICD-O-3) histology codes (8140-8148 adenocarcinoma NOS, 8210-8223
adenocarcinoma in situ of adenomatous polyp, 8261-8263 papillary adenocarcinoma,
8480-8483 mucinous adenocarcinoma, and 8490-8493 signet ring cell carcinoma). We
excluded patients who did not have their primary tumor resected and those with rectal
Author Manuscript

cancers. Patients were additionally excluded if they had previous invasive cancers at any
location, mortality within 90 days of diagnosis, resection over 180 days from diagnosis,
radiation, chemotherapy beyond one year from diagnosis, missing lymph node evaluation
data, missing surgical margins, and if all treatment was performed at a center other than the
reporting facility. Detailed patient selection can be found in Figure 1.

Study design
MSI status was defined using the collaborative stage site-specific data provided by the
NCDB, which classifies patients as MSS, MSI-low, MSI-high, or MSI-NOS. Patients were
in the MSI-H group if they were specifically reported to be MSI-H. For the purpose of the
study, patients were included in the comparison group if they were reported to be MSS or
MSI-L (MSS/MSI-L). Patients reported as MSI-NOS or with missing MSI data were
Author Manuscript

excluded. The primary outcome was OS from time of diagnosis and patients were censored
if alive at the time of last follow up.

Demographic data and comorbid status were recorded for each patient. NCDB captures
comorbidities using the Charlson-Deyo index, a weighted score derived from 15 comorbid
conditions that correlates with survival.16 Oncologic variables were recorded including
primary tumor side (right colon defined as cecum to distal transverse colon and left colon
defined as splenic flexure to rectosigmoid) and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, which was
recorded as a binary yes/no, regardless of single-agent or multi-agent therapy. High-risk
features were defined as high-grade histology (poorly differentiated or undifferentiated),
LVI, PNI, T4 stage, less than 12 lymph nodes (<12 LNs) examined in the surgical specimen,
and positive surgical margins (either positive proximal/distal margin or positive
circumferential resection margin).
Author Manuscript

Statistical Analysis
Baseline characteristics between groups were compared using 2-sample t tests for
continuous variables and χ 2 tests for categorical variables. We analyzed OS using Kaplan-
Meier (KM) estimators, comparing groups stratified by MSI status and specific high-risk
features with the log-rank test, as well as multivariable Cox proportional hazard models
(separate models for MSS/MSI-L and MSI-H groups) to adjust for possible confounding

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 5

variables. We additionally performed subgroup analyses on patients with MSI-H cancers

Author Manuscript

who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy to describe OS in this cohort. All statistical
analyses were 2-sided and considered significant if p < .05. Variables in which data are
reported as “unknown” had a separate indicator category created. All statistical analyses
were performed using SPSS software, version 25.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk NY).

RESULTS
Baseline characteristics
We identified 16,788 patients with primary stage II colon adenocarcinoma and known
microsatellite status, of which 1,709 were MSI-H (10.2%) and 15,079 were MSS/MSI-L
(89.8%). Median follow up was 34.8 months (IQR 19.7-53.5 months). Patient characteristics
are listed in Table 1. Patients who were female and white race were more likely to have
MSI-H cancers. Furthermore, MSI-H cancers were more likely to be right sided, high-grade,
Author Manuscript

and have 12 nodes examined in the surgical specimen, and less likely to receive
chemotherapy.

MSI status and high-risk features

Overall, in patients with resected stage II colon cancers, MSI-H cancers were associated
with improved OS compared to MSS/MSI-L cancers (5-year OS 83% vs 76%, p=0.01). Of
the included patients, 7,202 patients had at least one high-risk feature (42.9%). The presence
of at least one high-risk feature was associated with significantly worse OS when compared
to patients with no high-risk features (5-year OS 73% vs 80%, p<0.001). In patients with
MSI-H cancers, the presence of at least one high-risk feature was also associated with worse
OS (5-year OS 80% vs 85%). Yet, based on MSI status, patients with cancers that were both
MSI-H and high-risk had significantly better OS than patients with cancers that were MSS/
Author Manuscript

MSI-L and high-risk (5-year OS 80% vs 72%, p=0.01) and equivalent survival to patients
with MSS/MSI-L cancers and no high-risk features (5-year OS 80%). MSI-H cancers with
no high-risk features had the most favorable OS (5-year OS 85%).

LVI, PNI, and high-grade histology

We next sought to determine if MSI status was associated with OS when considering
specific high-risk features. On univariable KM analysis, we observed that patients with LVI,
PNI, or high-grade histology present exhibited a survival benefit based on the presence of
MSI-H compared to MSS/MSI-L. In these analyses, 5-year OS for patients with MSI-H
compared to patients with MSS/MSI-L was 85% vs 69% for LVI-present cancers (p<0.01),
75% vs 59% for PNI-present cancers (p<0.01), and 82% vs 73% for high-grade vs. low
Author Manuscript

grade histology (p<0.01). Interestingly, in patients with MSI-H cancers, LVI, PNI, and high-
grade histology were not associated with worse survival; however, these high-risk features
were associated with worse survival in patients with MSS/MSI-L cancers (Figure 2A-C).

T4 stage, positive margins, and inadequate lymph nodes

In contrast to other high-risk features, patients with either T4 stage, positive margins, or <12
LNs saw no survival benefit based on MSI-H status compared to those with MSS/MSI-L
cancers. Similarly, both subgroups of MSI-H and MSS/MSI-L cancers had reductions in OS

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 6

when high-risk features of T4 stage, <12 LNs, or positive margins were present (Figure 2D-
Author Manuscript

F).

Multivariable analyses
When adjusting for patient demographics, tumor side, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, and
high-risk features, the association between MSI-H status and OS was again observed (HR
0.75, 95%CI 0.65-0.87, p<0.01) (Table 2). We next created separate models for MSS/MSI-L
and MSI-H cancers to determine adjusted hazard ratios for individual high-risk features. In
the regression model including only MSS/MSI-L patients, all high-risk features were
associated with worse survival (Table 3). However, in the analysis of MSI-H patients, only
T4 stage (HR 2.61, 95%C 1.83-3.72, p<0.01) and positive margins (HR 1.73, 95%CI
1.07-2.80, p=0.02) were associated with worse OS (Table 3). All other high-risk features
(i.e. LVI, PNI, high tumor grade, and <12 LNs) were not associated with worse OS in
Author Manuscript

patients with MSI-H cancers. Of note, unknown PNI status was associated with worse OS.

Subgroup analyses
Given the NCCN recommendation to observe all MSI-H stage II colon cancers, we
performed a subgroup analysis of 1462 patients with MSI-H cancers who did not receive
adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim was to describe the relationship between OS and high-risk
features that potentially do not benefit from MSI-H status (T4 stage, positive margins, <12
LNs), in the absence of chemotherapy. Compared to patients with T3 stage tumors, patients
with T4 stage tumors in this subgroup again had significantly worse 5-year OS (Figure 3A,
84% vs 68%, p<0.001). Due to smaller sample sizes, cases with positive margins or <12
LNs were combined for analysis. Compared to patients without positive margins or <12
LNs, patients with these features also had significantly worse 5-year OS (Figure 3B, 84% vs
Author Manuscript

67%, p<0.001). In a model adjusting for patient demographics, tumor side, and other high-
risk features, T4 stage (HR 2.22 95%CI 1.47-3.34, p<0.01) and positive margins/<12 LNs
(HR 1.66 95%CI 1.07-2.57, p=0.02) were again associated with worse OS.

We next analyzed 481 patients with MSI-H cancers who did not receive chemotherapy and
were only considered high-risk if they had pathologic features of LVI, PNI, or high-grade
histology. Patients with T4 stage tumors, positive margins, or <12 LNs in their specimen
were excluded due to their negative association with OS. On KM analysis, we observed a
similar trend to the overall cohort, as LVI, PNI, and high-grade histology had similar 5-year
OS to patients without these features (85% vs 85%, p=0.9).

DISCUSSION
Author Manuscript

While the association between MSI-H status and improved survival in stage II colon cancer
has been reproducible in the literature, the prognostic importance of MSI status in stage II
colon cancer with high-risk features has not been well described. Our data again show that
for patients with stage II colon cancer, MSI-H cancers were associated with favorable OS
compared to MSS/MSI-L cancers. Our data add to the body of literature by demonstrating
that in patients with MSI-H cancers, certain high-risk features (LVI, PNI, and high-grade
histology) were not associated with worse survival compared to cancers without these

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 7

features, while other high-risk features (T4 stage, positive resection margins, and inadequate
Author Manuscript

nodal sampling) were associated with worse survival. In other words, in MSI-H cancers,
some conventional high-risk features were no longer high-risk for worse survival. In
contrast, all high-risk features analyzed in this study were associated with worse survival in
MSS/MSI-L cancers. It is unclear why only some high-risk features are still associated with
worse survival in the presence of MSI-H biology, and others are not. One potential
explanation is that features such as positive margins and inadequate nodal sampling
represent risks associated with sub-standard surgery that are not outweighed by favorable
biology. Similarly, T4 stage suggests potential involvement beyond the plane of surgical
resection.

Given the NCCN guideline to observe all MSI-H stage II colon cancers based on lack of
response to 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy,11,12 we additionally performed subgroup
analyses on patients with MSI-H cancers who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. We
Author Manuscript

again showed that T4 stage, positive margins, and inadequate lymph node sampling were
associated with worse OS. In contrast, the 5-year OS rate in patients with MSI-H and high-
risk features of LVI, PNI, or high-grade histology was equivalent to patients without these
features, and quite favorable at 85%. PNI-unknown status was associated with worse OS,
possibly due to other negative risk factors with high prevalence in this group that were not
accounted for. Notably, our data provide an important descriptive reference for oncologists,
and support current NCCN recommendations to forego chemotherapy in MSI-H cancers
with otherwise high-risk features, at least inclusive of LVI, PNI, and high-grade histology.
Nevertheless, the data also highlight that patients with MSI-H cancers that are T4 stage, have
positive margins, or <12 lymph nodes in the surgical specimen would greatly benefit from
the identification of adjunctive therapies that may improve prognosis. While it would have
been of interest to investigate the role of chemotherapy in this subgroup, the NCDB lacks
Author Manuscript

detail on specific chemotherapeutic agents/regimens used, making it less than ideal for this
purpose. Of note, some have suggested that oxaliplatin-based therapy may be beneficial in
stage II MSI-H cancers,17 and the recent NICHE trial demonstrated early promising results
in the treatment of mismatch repair-deficient early stage colon cancer with neoadjuvant
immune checkpoint inhibitors.18

Current data describing the relationship between MSI status and high-risk features in stage II
disease is limited, and the few studies that have attempted to investigate high-risk features in
MSI-H patients are limited by small sample sizes. In a 2016 study of 329 stage II-IV colon
cancer patients who underwent resection at a single center, Oh et al.19 reported that only PNI
and disease stage were independently associated with disease free survival, and only disease
stage was associated with OS. Interestingly, conventional high-risk features were all
Author Manuscript

associated with worse survival in MSS cancers, but not in MSI-H cancers, which is
consistent with our findings in stage II cancers. Baek et al.20 similarly studied 237 patients,
of which 76 were MSI-H. In their cohort, MSI status had no prognostic effect on OS or
disease-free survival, however they were limited by a small sample size of patients with
MSI-H cancers. A 2019 study using NCDB data from 2010-2013 included 843 MSI-H
cancers from stage II colon cancer patients.21 The study was focused primarily on the effect
of adjuvant chemotherapy on MSI-H cancers, however in the cox regression analysis
displayed in their supplemental data, MSI-H status was protective, while T4, PNI, and <12

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 8

nodes were associated with worse survival. While this analysis is similar to our study, they
Author Manuscript

did not consider the prognostic effect on OS for each feature separately, which proved to be
informative in our study.

While previous studies have seldom examined the interaction between MSI status and high-
risk features that warrant consideration for chemotherapy per NCCN guidelines, there are
many studies that do investigate how MSI status impacts prognosis in early stage colon
cancer in light of other important factors. For example, studies22-24 analyzing the interaction
between MSI status and BRAF mutation in colon cancer have observed a similar beneficial
effect of MSI status as seen in the present study. That is, BRAF mutations do not appear to
be associated with worse survival in the setting of MSI-H cancers, while they are frequently
associated with worse prognosis in early-stage MSS colon cancer. These studies assessing
the prognostic effect of combinations of markers on colon cancer survival further support
our current findings of a complex interplay between MSI status and high-risk features.
Author Manuscript

Furthermore, a 2019 study using a similar NCDB cohort of patients found that MSI-H
cancers may not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy when adjusting for high-risk features,
and that MSS cancers benefitted from chemotherapy even in the absence of high-risk
features.21 Taken together with our findings, the data support that MSI-H cancers seem to
have a different natural history than MSS cancers, likely due to important differences in their
underlying biology.

There are several limitations to consider when interpreting these data. First, considering our
primary outcome of OS, the study cohort had a relatively short median follow-up of 35
months. Second, the NCDB does not provide clinical data for some variables that may
impact OS. For example, NCDB does not record whether an operation is done urgent/
emergently or if indications such as obstruction or perforation are present. Similarly, a
Author Manuscript

number of important pathologic characteristics that influence survival are not recorded, and
some of the variables that are recorded may not be standardized – most relevant to our study
may be the lack of data on BRAF status and whether LVI represented extramural vs
intramural vascular invasion. Additionally, data on comorbid conditions is limited to the
Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index, and we are not able to adjust for specific disease. We
attempted to limit any effect of surgical complications by excluding patients who died within
90 days of surgery. Lastly, the database is retrospective and is subject to selection bias for
various oncologic treatments. However, the NCDB contains the largest number of incident
cancer cases available for analysis, and we leveraged the size of the database to create the
largest cohort of MSI-H stage II colon cancers to date.

CONCLUSION
Author Manuscript

In conclusion, our data demonstrate that MSI status is likely to be an important prognostic
factor in stage II colon cancer, however its effect on OS may be dependent on the individual
cancers’ high-risk features. Our data have several clinical implications. Importantly, by
showing that patients with MSI-H cancers and LVI, PNI, or high-grade histology have
equivalent survival to patients with MSI-H cancers without these high-risk features, even in
the setting of deferring chemotherapy, the data provide some support for NCCN guidelines
recommending no chemotherapy in this group of patients. However, further investigation is

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 9

needed to determine if chemotherapy or other adjuvant therapies are beneficial in MSI-H

Author Manuscript

stage II colon cancer with other high-risk features. Furthermore, in the research setting, MSI
status needs to be a factor in selecting/randomizing patients for clinical trials and should
universally be considered in risk adjustment models in retrospective studies.

Acknowledgments
Funding support: Paul Cavallaro is supported by the following grants: 2018 American Society of Colon and
Rectal Surgeons Resident Research Award; Research Training in Alimentary Tract Surgery T32 Grant
(5T32DK007754-19)

REFERENCES
1. Gryfe R, Kim H, Hsieh ET, et al. Tumor microsatellite instability and clinical outcome in young
patients with colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:69–77. [PubMed: 10631274]
Author Manuscript

2. Hutchins G, Southward K, Handley K, et al. Value of mismatch repair, KRAS, and BRAF mutations
in predicting recurrence and benefits from chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol.
2011;29:1261–1270. [PubMed: 21383284]
3. Watanabe T, Wu TT, Catalano PJ, et al. Molecular predictors of survival after adjuvant
chemotherapy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1196–1206. [PubMed: 11309634]
4. Dienstmann R, Mason MJ, Sinicrope FA, et al. Prediction of overall survival in stage II and III colon
cancer beyond TNM system: a retrospective, pooled biomarker study. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:1023–
1031. [PubMed: 28453697]
5. Quah HM, Chou JF, Gonen M, et al. Identification of patients with high-risk stage II colon cancer
for adjuvant therapy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:503–507. [PubMed: 18322753]
6. Benson AB III, Schrag D, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology
recommendations on adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3408–
3419. [PubMed: 15199089]
7. Compton CC, Fielding LP, Burgart LJ, et al. Prognostic factors in colorectal cancer. College of
American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:979–994.
Author Manuscript

[PubMed: 10888773]
8. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Colon cancer (version 3.2020). www.nccn.org/
professionals/physician_gls/pdf/colon.pdf. Published 2020. Accessed May 31, 2020.
9. Zhang C, Yin S, Tan Y, et al. Patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk stage II colon
cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Oncol. 2020;43:279–287. [PubMed:
31934881]
10. Simillis C, Singh HKSI, Afxentiou T, et al. Postoperative chemotherapy improves survival in
patients with resected high-risk Stage II colorectal cancer: results of a systematic review and meta-
analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2020;22:1231–1244. [PubMed: 31999888]
11. Ribic CM, Sargent DJ, Moore MJ, et al. Tumor microsatellite-instability status as a predictor of
benefit from fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med.
2003;349:247–257. [PubMed: 12867608]
12. Carethers JM, Smith EJ, Behling CA, et al. Use of 5-fluorouracil and survival in patients with
microsatellite-unstable colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:394–401. [PubMed:
Author Manuscript

14762775]
13. Sargent DJ, Marsoni S, Monges G, et al. Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack
of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3219–
3226. [PubMed: 20498393]
14. Babcock BD, Aljehani MA, Jabo B, et al. High-risk stage II colon cancer: not all risks are created
equal. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:1980–1985. [PubMed: 29675762]
15. National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) Participant Use Data File—Data Dictionary. (Version: PUF.
2016). www.facs.org/~/media/files/qualityprograms/cancer/ncdb/pufdatadictionaryversion
puf2014.ashx. Accessed February, 2020.

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 10

16. Ladha KS, Zhao K, Quraishi SA, et al. The Deyo-Charlson and Elixhauser-van Walraven
Comorbidity Indices as predictors of mortality in critically ill patients. BMJ Open.
Author Manuscript

2015;5:e008990.
17. Alwers E, Jansen L, Bläker H, et al. Microsatellite instability and survival after adjuvant
chemotherapy among stage II and III colon cancer patients: results from a population-based study.
Mol Oncol. 2020;14:363–372. [PubMed: 31816156]
18. Chalabi M, Fanchi LF, Dijkstra KK, et al. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy leads to pathological
responses in MMR-proficient and MMR-deficient early-stage colon cancers. Nat Med.
2020;26:566–576. [PubMed: 32251400]
19. Oh BY, Huh JW, Park YA, et al. Prognostic factors in sporadic colon cancer with high-level
microsatellite instability. Surgery. 2016;159:1372–1381. [PubMed: 26775578]
20. Baek DW, Kang BW, Lee SJ, et al. Clinical implications of mismatch repair status in patients with
high-risk stage II colon cancer. In Vivo. 2019;33:649–657. [PubMed: 30804154]
21. Koenig JL, Toesca DAS, Harris JP, et al. Microsatellite instability and adjuvant chemotherapy in
stage II colon cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2019;42:573–580. [PubMed: 31166206]
22. Bläker H, Alwers E, Arnold A, et al. The association between mutations in BRAF and colorectal
Author Manuscript

cancer-specific survival depends on microsatellite status and tumor stage. Clin Gastroenterol
Hepatol. 2019;17:455–462.e6. [PubMed: 29660527]
23. Phipps AI, Limburg PJ, Baron JA, et al. Association between molecular subtypes of colorectal
cancer and patient survival. Gastroenterology. 2015;148:77–87.e2. [PubMed: 25280443]
24. Phipps AI, Buchanan DD, Makar KW, et al. BRAF mutation status and survival after colorectal
cancer diagnosis according to patient and tumor characteristics. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers
Prev. 2012;21:1792–1798. [PubMed: 22899730]
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 11
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Patient selection CONSORT diagram.
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 12
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 2.
A-F. Univariable Kaplan Meier analysis stratified by MSI status and high-risk features. MSS
= patients in MSS/MSI-L group; LVI = lymphovascular invasion; PNI = perineural invasion.
Author Manuscript

RM = resection margin; LN = lymph nodes; NS= not significant (p > 0.05).

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 13
Author Manuscript

Figure 3.
Author Manuscript

A-B. Univariable Kaplan Meier analysis of subgroup of MSI-H patients that did not receive
chemotherapy, stratified by T stage and the presence of positive resection margins or <12
lymph nodes in the surgical specimen. LN = lymph nodes.
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 14

Table 1.

Patient Characteristics
Author Manuscript

Variable MSS/MSI-L MSI-H

(n = 15,079) (n = 1,709) p value
Demographics
Age (SD) 65.4 (13.6) 65.1 (15.4) 0.336
Female (%) 7,453 (49.4) 969 (56.7) <0.001
Race
White 12,272 (81.4) 1,503 (87.9) <0.001
Black 1,873 (12.4) 121 (7.1)
Other 934 (6.2) 85 (5.0)
Institution type
Community Cancer Program 1,243 (8.5) 133 (9.0) <0.001
Author Manuscript

Comprehensive Community Program 6,158 (42.1) 674 (42.3)

Academic/Research 4,691 (32.1) 581 (36.5)
Integrated Network Cancer Program 2,528 (17.3) 193 (12.1)
Primary Payor
Not insured 581 (3.9) 50 (2.9) 0.269
Private insurance 5,825 (38.6) 648 (37.9)
Medicaid 887 (5.9) 90 (5.3)
Medicare 7,489 (49.7) 887 (51.9)
Other Government 141 9).9) 15 (0.9)
Unknown 156 (1.0) 19 (1.1)
Charlson-Deyo score
0 10,331 (68.5) 1,165 (68.2) 0.341
Author Manuscript

1 3,327 (22.1) 371 (21.7)

2 945 (6.3) 125 (7.3)
3+ 476 (3.2) 48 (2.8)
Primary Tumor Site
Right colon 8,256 (54.8) 1,362 (79.7) <0.001
Left colon/Rectosigmoid 6,823 (45.2) 347 (20.3)
Adjuvant chemotherapy 3,269 (21.7) 247 (14.5) <0.001
T Stage
T3 12,906 (85.6) 1,466 (85.8) 0.830
T4 2,173 (14.4) 243 (14.2)
Lymphovascular Invasion
Absent 12,330 (81.8) 1,359 (79.5) 0.063
Author Manuscript

Present 1,980 (13.1) 247 (14.5)

Unknown 769 (5.1) 103 (6.0)
Perineural Invasion
Absent 13,505 (89.6) 1,542 (90.2) 0.108
Present 1,115 (7.4) 106 (6.2)

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 15

Variable MSS/MSI-L MSI-H

(n = 15,079) (n = 1,709) p value
Author Manuscript

Unknown 459 (3.0) 61 (3.6)

Tumor Grade
Low Grade 13,032 (86.4) 1,088 (63.7) <0.001
High Grade 1,774 (11.8) 585 (34.2)
Unknown 273 (1.8) 36 (2.1)
Positive Margins 874 (5.8) 102 (6.0) 0.773
< 12 Lymph Nodes 931 (6.2) 54 (3.2) <0.001
High Risk Features 5,731/13,713 (41.8%) 818/1,537 (53.2%) <0.001
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 16

Table 2.

Adjusted hazard ratios for mortality in stage II colon cancer based on patient and tumor features.
Author Manuscript

Variable HR (95% CI) p-value

MSI-H (vs MSS/MSI-L) 0.75 (0.65-0.87) <0.001
Age (SD) 1.06 (1.05-1.06) <0.001
Female (%) 0.78 (0.72-0.85) <0.001
Race
White Ref Ref
Black 1.29 (1.14-1.46) <0.001
Other 0.69 (0.56-0.87) <0.001
Institution type
Community Cancer Program Ref Ref
Comprehensive Community Program 0.88 (0.76-1.10) 0.066
Author Manuscript

Academic/Research 0.80 (0.69-0.93) 0.003

Integrated Network Cancer Program 0.89 (0.76-1.05) 0.170
Primary Payor
Not insured Ref Ref
Private insurance 0.72 (0.55-0.95) 0.022
Medicaid 1.21 (0.88-1.67) 0.247
Medicare 0.89 (0.67-1.17) 0.404
Other Government 0.99 (0.60-1.64) 0.961
Unknown 0.96 (0.59-1.57) 0.873
Charlson-Deyo score
0 Ref Ref
1 1.22 (1.12-1.34) <0.001
Author Manuscript

2 1.83 (1.62-2.08) <0.001

3+ 2.61 (2.23-3.05) <0.001
Primary Tumor Site
Left colon/rectosigmoid Ref Ref
Right colon 0.89 (0.82-0.97) 0.005
Adjuvant chemotherapy 0.90 (0.80-1.02) 0.096
T4 Stage 1.77 (1.59-1.96) <0.001
Lymphovascular Invasion
Absent Ref Ref
Present 1.19 (1.06-1.33) 0.003
Unknown 1.09 (0.92-1.30) 0.331
Perineural Invasion
Author Manuscript

Absent Ref Ref

Present 1.40 (1.22-1.60) <0.001
Unknown 1.01 (0.81-1.27) 0.921
Tumor Grade
Low Grade Ref Ref

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 17

Variable HR (95% CI) p-value

High Grade 1.12 (0.99-1.24) 0.052
Author Manuscript

Unknown 1.03 (0.78-1.36) 0.826

Positive Margins 1.36 (1.18-1.57) <0.001
< 12 Lymph Nodes 1.27 (1.11-1.45) <0.001
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.
 Cavallaro et al. Page 18

Table 3.

Adjusted hazard ratios for mortality from stage II colon cancer based on MSI status
Author Manuscript

MSS/MSI-L MSI-H

Variable HR (95% CI) p-value HR (95% CI) p-value

Adjuvant chemotherapy 0.87 (0.76-0.97) 0.027 1.42 (0.91-2.24) 0.124
T4 Stage 1.72 (1.04-1.32) 0.008 2.61 (1.83-3.72) <0.001
Lymphovascular Invasion
Absent Ref Ref Ref Ref
Present 1.22 (1.09-1.38) 0.001 0.90 (0.59-1.37) 0.625
Unknown 1.15 (0.96-1.38) 0.123 0.67 (0.36-1.25) 0.212
Perineural Invasion
Absent Ref Ref Ref Ref
Present 1.44 (1.26-1.66) <0.001 1.14 (0.63-2.05) 0.671
Author Manuscript

Unknown 0.92 (0.72-1.17) 0.499 2.06 (1.13-3.76) 0.018

Tumor Grade
Low Grade Ref Ref Ref Ref
High Grade 1.18 (1.04-1.32) 0.008 0.86 (0.63-1.17) 0.333
Unknown 0.95 (0.70-1.29) 0.733 1.82 (0.87-3.78) 0.111
Positive Margins 1.33 (1.14-1.54) <0.001 1.73 (1.07-2.80) 0.025
< 12 Lymph Nodes 1.26 (1.09-1.44) <0.001 1.56 (0.82-2.95) 0.173

*
Cox regression adjusting for age, sex, race, institution type, primary payor, Charlson-Deyo score, and tumor side
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Dis Colon Rectum. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2022 May 01.