Objective To evaluate the applicability and guideline concordance of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology(CSCO)arti-ficial intelligence(AI)system in clinical decision-making for colorectal cancer(CRC)patients,and to explore its feasibility in real-world clinical applications.Methods A total of 972 CRC patients diagnosed and treated at the Second Affiliated Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine,from January 2010 to December 2021,were included.Patient data were analyzed by the CSCO AI system to gener-ate treatment decisions,and decision concordance was assessed by a blinded independent central review(BICR)panel.The applicability and guideline concordance rates of the CSCO AI system were calculated for different treatment stages,and a logistic regression model was used to analyze factors influencing the system's decision discrepancies with actual treatments.Results The overall applicability rate of the CSCO AI system was 96.2%,and the overall guideline concordance rate was 94.9%.In the adjuvant and palliative treatment stages,the system's applicability rates were 95.8%and 96.7%,respectively,and the guideline concordance rates were 95.0%and 94.9%,respective-ly.Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age≥65 years and high-risk stage Ⅱ treatment were significant factors affecting guideline concordance in the adjuvant treatment stage(both P<0.05).Conclusions The CSCO AI system demonstrated high applicability and guideline concordance in the adjuvant and palliative treatment stages for CRC.The system's clinical decision-making potential is sig-nificant,and it can be further optimized for specific clinical scenarios and promoted for use across various medical institutions.

Objective To evaluate the applicability and guideline concordance of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology(CSCO)arti-ficial intelligence(AI)system in clinical decision-making for colorectal cancer(CRC)patients,and to explore its feasibility in real-world clinical applications.Methods A total of 972 CRC patients diagnosed and treated at the Second Affiliated Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine,from January 2010 to December 2021,were included.Patient data were analyzed by the CSCO AI system to gener-ate treatment decisions,and decision concordance was assessed by a blinded independent central review(BICR)panel.The applicability and guideline concordance rates of the CSCO AI system were calculated for different treatment stages,and a logistic regression model was used to analyze factors influencing the system's decision discrepancies with actual treatments.Results The overall applicability rate of the CSCO AI system was 96.2%,and the overall guideline concordance rate was 94.9%.In the adjuvant and palliative treatment stages,the system's applicability rates were 95.8%and 96.7%,respectively,and the guideline concordance rates were 95.0%and 94.9%,respective-ly.Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age≥65 years and high-risk stage Ⅱ treatment were significant factors affecting guideline concordance in the adjuvant treatment stage(both P<0.05).Conclusions The CSCO AI system demonstrated high applicability and guideline concordance in the adjuvant and palliative treatment stages for CRC.The system's clinical decision-making potential is sig-nificant,and it can be further optimized for specific clinical scenarios and promoted for use across various medical institutions.

Objective:To analyze the current adoption of palliative care by patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in China.Methods:From 1 March 2023 to 30 June 2023, a questionnaire survey was conducted by random sampling. An exclusive research platform for the Blue Book on Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. An online questionnaire was sent to medical oncologists (including chief physicians, associate chief physicians, attending physicians and residents) in general hospitals and oncology hospitals in four major regions of East, Central, South and Northeast China. The questionnaire contained 28 questions requesting basic information about doctors, the number of patients with mCRC, the status of treatment from first to fourth line and beyond, points concerning treatment of pain in patients with mCRC, and expectations for the future. A medical team was responsible for the quality control of data collected, whereas statisticians performed the data cleaning and sorting and statistical analysis.Results:A total of 300 clinical questionnaires were collected, including 217 (72%) from doctors in general hospitals and 83 (28%) from doctors in oncology hospitals. Senior physicians (including associate chief physicians and chief physicians) accounted for 65% of the respondents, attending physicians 30%, and residents 5%. Within 3 months (average for each month), 46.4±26.6% patients were diagnosed with recurrent or unresectable mCRC by each physician, 51.6±26.8% of the patients being in cancer hospitals and 44.4±26.3% in general hospitals. One hundred percent of patients receiving first-line treatment received palliative care, as did 80.3% of those receiving second-line treatment, 58.2% of those receiving third-line treatment, and 35.1% of those receiving ≥fourth-line treatment. The primary factor governing selection of first-line treatment was guideline recommendations, whereas comorbidities and the patients' physical status dictated second line to fourth line treatment. Standard first-line treatment was administered to 93.8% of eligible patients, standard second-line treatment to 94.3%; and standard third-line treatment to 73.5%. First-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.6% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.8%; second-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.0% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.0%; third-line therapy included targeted therapy in 59.2% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.2%; and fourth-line therapy included targeted therapy in 48.7% of patients and immunotherapy in 3.1%. First-line treatment lasted an average of 9.6 months, second-line treatment 6.7 months, third-line treatment 4.9 months, and fourth-line treatment 3.7 months. More than 70% of the patients maintained a good quality of life after receiving first and second-line treatment and more than 60% of them had ECOG performance scores of 0–1. After receiving third- and fourth-line treatment, 50%–60% of patients maintained a good quality of life and 40%–50% of them maintained ECOG performance scores of 0–1. The survey also revealed that the main deficiencies in treatment were limited effectiveness of third-line treatment, insufficient availability and opportunity for clinical research, popularity of new drugs or new drug combination strategies, and limited channels for participation in multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment. Clinicians reported looking forward to participating in more clinical research on new drugs, hearing about the experience of experts in the field, and discovery of new targets and new drugs that increased the options for posterior line treatment of colorectal cancer.Conclusions:This report objectively summarizes the current situation, treatment difficulties, and expectations of frontline physicians concerning management of mCRC, thus providing a basis for decision-making and future direction for the diagnosis and research on treatment of mCRC.

Objective:To analyze the current adoption of palliative care by patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in China.Methods:From 1 March 2023 to 30 June 2023, a questionnaire survey was conducted by random sampling. An exclusive research platform for the Blue Book on Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. An online questionnaire was sent to medical oncologists (including chief physicians, associate chief physicians, attending physicians and residents) in general hospitals and oncology hospitals in four major regions of East, Central, South and Northeast China. The questionnaire contained 28 questions requesting basic information about doctors, the number of patients with mCRC, the status of treatment from first to fourth line and beyond, points concerning treatment of pain in patients with mCRC, and expectations for the future. A medical team was responsible for the quality control of data collected, whereas statisticians performed the data cleaning and sorting and statistical analysis.Results:A total of 300 clinical questionnaires were collected, including 217 (72%) from doctors in general hospitals and 83 (28%) from doctors in oncology hospitals. Senior physicians (including associate chief physicians and chief physicians) accounted for 65% of the respondents, attending physicians 30%, and residents 5%. Within 3 months (average for each month), 46.4±26.6% patients were diagnosed with recurrent or unresectable mCRC by each physician, 51.6±26.8% of the patients being in cancer hospitals and 44.4±26.3% in general hospitals. One hundred percent of patients receiving first-line treatment received palliative care, as did 80.3% of those receiving second-line treatment, 58.2% of those receiving third-line treatment, and 35.1% of those receiving ≥fourth-line treatment. The primary factor governing selection of first-line treatment was guideline recommendations, whereas comorbidities and the patients' physical status dictated second line to fourth line treatment. Standard first-line treatment was administered to 93.8% of eligible patients, standard second-line treatment to 94.3%; and standard third-line treatment to 73.5%. First-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.6% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.8%; second-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.0% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.0%; third-line therapy included targeted therapy in 59.2% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.2%; and fourth-line therapy included targeted therapy in 48.7% of patients and immunotherapy in 3.1%. First-line treatment lasted an average of 9.6 months, second-line treatment 6.7 months, third-line treatment 4.9 months, and fourth-line treatment 3.7 months. More than 70% of the patients maintained a good quality of life after receiving first and second-line treatment and more than 60% of them had ECOG performance scores of 0–1. After receiving third- and fourth-line treatment, 50%–60% of patients maintained a good quality of life and 40%–50% of them maintained ECOG performance scores of 0–1. The survey also revealed that the main deficiencies in treatment were limited effectiveness of third-line treatment, insufficient availability and opportunity for clinical research, popularity of new drugs or new drug combination strategies, and limited channels for participation in multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment. Clinicians reported looking forward to participating in more clinical research on new drugs, hearing about the experience of experts in the field, and discovery of new targets and new drugs that increased the options for posterior line treatment of colorectal cancer.Conclusions:This report objectively summarizes the current situation, treatment difficulties, and expectations of frontline physicians concerning management of mCRC, thus providing a basis for decision-making and future direction for the diagnosis and research on treatment of mCRC.

Objective:To investigate the effect of different primary sites of colorectal cancer on early recurrence after radical resection of metastatic tumor clinical risk score (CRS).Methods:The data of colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM )surgically resected between Jan 2015 and Feb 2020 were retrospectively analyzed at Li Huili Hospital and Ningbo University People's Hospital. Risk factors leading to early recurrence after CRLM resection were analyzed by univariate analysis, and the significant results were then subjected to multifactorial analysis by COX regression model. Kaplan-Meire method was used to analyze the effect of primary site on disease-free survival at 1 year after CRLM resection in different CRS subgroups.Results:A total of 209 patients were included in the study, including 143 patients with primary tumors in the left colon and 66 in the right colon. One hundred and three (49.3%) patients with recurrence within 1 year.Univariate analysis showed that primary tumor site, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and CRS were correlated with recurrence. Multivariate analysis showed that right colon cancer, poor efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy, and high risk of CRS were independent risk factors (all P<0.05). Patients with an overall low CRS risk group and low CRS after treatment, had a higher recurrence rate (all P<0.05) within 1 year when primary tumor located right colon. Conclusion:The location of the primary tumor in the right colon is an independent risk factor for recurrence within 1 year after radical surgery in patients with CRLM.

Perioperative treatment combined with radical resection is the major approach to cure non-metastatic colon cancer. A precise evaluation and perioperative treatment would probably improve the R0 resection rate, recurrence-free survival and overall survival of colon cancer patients. Recently, individualized treatment is the mainstream due to the development of molecular pathology and multi-disciplinary therapy. The indications and course of perioperative treatment and preoperative neoadjuvant therapy of colon cancer are still in intense discussion. The present review will mainly discuss three topics. Firstly, the various reaction of adjuvant therapy to stage II colon cancer is caused by patients′ heterogeneity. Choosing stratified treatment for these patients according to clinical and molecular pathological features is the future. Secondly, we discuss the adjuvant chemotherapy course for stage III colon cancer according to the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) guideline and the progress of this field. Lastly, we summarize the status and significance of colon cancer neoadjuvant therapy.

Perioperative treatment combined with radical resection is the major approach to cure non?metastatic colon cancer. A precise evaluation and perioperative treatment would probably improve the R0 resection rate, recurrence?free survival and overall survival of colon cancer patients. Recently, individualized treatment is the mainstream due to the development of molecular pathology and multi ? disciplinary therapy. The indications and course of perioperative treatment and preoperative neoadjuvant therapy of colon cancer are still in intense discussion. The present review will mainly discuss three topics. Firstly, the various reaction of adjuvant therapy to stage II colon cancer is caused by patients′ heterogeneity. Choosing stratified treatment for these patients according to clinical and molecular pathological features is the future. Secondly, we discuss the adjuvant chemotherapy course for stage III colon cancer according to the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) guideline and the progress of this field. Lastly, we summarize the status and significance of colon cancer neoadjuvant therapy.

Perioperative treatment combined with radical resection is the major approach to cure non?metastatic colon cancer. A precise evaluation and perioperative treatment would probably improve the R0 resection rate, recurrence?free survival and overall survival of colon cancer patients. Recently, individualized treatment is the mainstream due to the development of molecular pathology and multi ? disciplinary therapy. The indications and course of perioperative treatment and preoperative neoadjuvant therapy of colon cancer are still in intense discussion. The present review will mainly discuss three topics. Firstly, the various reaction of adjuvant therapy to stage II colon cancer is caused by patients′ heterogeneity. Choosing stratified treatment for these patients according to clinical and molecular pathological features is the future. Secondly, we discuss the adjuvant chemotherapy course for stage III colon cancer according to the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) guideline and the progress of this field. Lastly, we summarize the status and significance of colon cancer neoadjuvant therapy.

Lungs are the second most common distant metastatic organs of colorectal cancer, following the liver. However, clinical re-searches on lung metastasis are insufficient comparing with that on liver metastasis due to its low occurrence and relatively mild bio-logical behavior. This paper aims to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic factors of rectal cancer patients with multiple synchronous lung metastases. The patient was from the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, School of Medi-cine underwent multi-disciplinary diagnosis and treatment. Moreover, this article aims to discuss the related existing consensus and controversies on this issue.