Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in rectal carcinoma: a review of the Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group experience

The therapeutic and adverse effects of modified radiation fields for patients with rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the therapeutic effect and complications of modified radiation fields (MRFs) with those of conventional pelvic radiation fields (CPRFs) for rectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From December 1996 to October 2009, a total of 160 patients with rectal carcinoma who received total mesorectal excision and postoperative radiotherapy were examined. Ninety-four patients were in the CPRFs group, and 66 were in the MRFs group. The dose was 50 Gy per 25 fractions in the initial plan.

RESULTS

The treatment volume and the volume of small bowel that received more than 15 Gy of the MRFs was smaller than that of the CPRFs (P < .001). The rates of local recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival were not statistically significant between the MRFs and CPRFs groups (P > .05). There was a statistical difference (P < .05) in the incidence of acute toxicity, which included serious complications in the lower digestive tract (grade ≥3). The completion rate for the initial radiotherapy plan was higher in the MRFs group than in the CPRFs group (P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CPRFs, MRFs manifested a lower incidence of complications and the same therapeutic effects. This finding will facilitate the clinical application of MRFs for patients with rectal cancer.

Shifting concepts in rectal cancer management: a review of contemporary primary rectal cancer treatment strategies

The management of rectal cancer has transformed over the last 3 decades and continues to evolve. Some of these changes parallel progress made with other cancers: refinement of surgical technique to improve organ preservation, selective use of neoadjuvant (and adjuvant) therapy, and emergence of criteria suggesting a role for individually tailored therapy. Other changes are driven by fairly unique issues including functional considerations, rectal anatomic features, and surgical technical issues. Further complexity is due to the variety of staging modalities (each with its own limitations), neoadjuvant treatment alternatives, and competing strategies for sequencing multimodal treatment even for nonmetastatic disease. Importantly, observations of tumor response made in the era of neoadjuvant therapy are reshaping some traditionally held concepts about tumor behavior. Frameworks for prioritizing and integrating complex data can help to formulate treatment plans for patients.

Oncologic Outcomes and Risk Factors for Recurrence after Tumor-specific Mesorectal Excision of Rectal Cancer: 782 Cases

Purpose

The aim of this study was to analyze the oncologic outcomes and the risk factors for recurrence after a tumor-specific mesorectal excision (TSME) of resectable rectal cancer in a single institution.

Methods

A total of 782 patients who underwent a TSME for resectable rectal cancer between February 1995 and December 2005 were enrolled retrospectively. Oncologic outcomes included 5-year cancer-specific survival and its affecting factors, as well as risk factors for local and systemic recurrence.

Results

The 5-year cancer-specific survival rate was 77.53% with a mean follow-up period of 61 ± 31 months. The overall local and systemic recurrence rates were 9.2% and 21.1%, respectively. The risk factors for local recurrence were pN stage (P = 0.015), positive distal resection margin, and positive circumferential resection margin (P < 0.001). The risk factors for systemic recurrence were pN stage (P < 0.001) and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level (P = 0.005). The prognostic factors for cancer-specific survival were pT stage (P < 0.001), pN stage (P < 0.001), positive distal resection margin (P = 0.005), and positive circumferential resection margin (P = 0.016).

Conclusion

The oncologic outcomes in our institution after a TSME for patients with resectable rectal cancer were similar to those reported in other recent studies, and we established the risk factors that could be crucial for the planning of treatment and follow-up.

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the Western world. Apart from surgery - which remains the mainstay of treatment for resectable primary tumours - postoperative (i.e., adjuvant) chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based regimens is now the standard treatment in Dukes' C (TNM stage III) colon tumours i.e. tumours with metastases in the regional lymph nodes but no distant metastases. In contrast, the evidence for recommendations of adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer is sparse. In Europe it is generally acknowledged that locally advanced rectal tumours receive preoperative (i.e., neoadjuvant) downstaging by radiotherapy (or chemoradiotion), whereas in the US postoperative chemoradiotion is considered the treatment of choice in all Dukes' C rectal cancers. Overall, no universal consensus exists on the adjuvant treatment of surgically resectable rectal carcinoma; moreover, no formal systematic review and meta-analysis has been so far performed on this subject.

OBJECTIVES

We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature from 1975 until March 2011 in order to quantitatively summarize the available evidence regarding the impact of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on the survival of patients with surgically resectable rectal cancer. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

SEARCH METHODS

CCCG standard search strategy in defined databases with the following supplementary search. 1. Rect* or colorect* - 2. Cancer or carcinom* or adenocarc* or neoplasm* or tumour - 3. Adjuv* - 4. Chemother* - 5. Postoper*

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer who received no adjuvant chemotherapy with those receiving any postoperative chemotherapy regimen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data and a third author performed an independent search for verification. The main outcome measure was the hazard ratio (HR) between the risk of event between the treatment arm (adjuvant chemotherapy) and the control arm (no adjuvant chemotherapy). The survival data were either entered directly in RevMan or extrapolated from Kaplan-Meier plots and then entered in RevMan. Due to expected clinical heterogeneity a random effects model was used for creating the pooled estimates of treatment efficacy.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 21 eligible RCTs were identified and used for meta-analysis purposes. Overall, 16,215 patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled, 9,785 being affected with rectal carcinoma. Considering patients with rectal cancer only, 4,854 cases were randomized to receive potentially curative surgery of the primary tumour plus adjuvant chemotherapy and 4,367 to receive surgery plus observation. The mean number of patients enrolled was 466 (range: 54-1,243 cases). 11 RCTs had been performed in Western countries and 10 in Japan. All trials used fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy (no modern drugs - such as oxaliplatin, irinotecan or biological agents - were tested).Overall survival (OS) data were available in 21 RCTs and the data available for meta-analysis regarded 9,221 patients: of these, 4854 patients were randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,367 patients did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a significant reduction in the risk of death (17%) among patients undergoing postoperative chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.83, CI: 0.76-0.91). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=30%) but significant (P=0.09) at the 10% alpha level.Disease-free survival (DFS) data were reported in 20 RCTs, and the data suitable for meta-analysis included 8,530 patients. Of these, 4,515 patients were randomized to postoperative chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,015 patients received no postoperative chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a reduction in the risk of disease recurrence (25%) among patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.75, CI: 0.68-0.83). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=41%) but significant (P=0.03).While analyzing both OS and DFS data, sensitivity analyses did not find any difference in treatment effect based on trial sample size or geographical region (Western vs Japanese). Available data were insufficient to investigate on the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy separately in different TNM stages in terms of both OS and DFS. No plausible source of heterogeneity was formally identified, although variability in treatment regimens and TNM stages of enrolled patients might have played a significant role in the difference of reported results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis support the use of 5-FU based postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients undergoing apparently radical surgery for non-metastatic rectal carcinoma. Available data do not allow us to define whether the efficacy of this treatment is highest in one specific TNM stage. The implementation of modern anti-cancer agents in the adjuvant setting is warranted to improve the results shown by this meta-analysis. Randomized trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients receiving preoperative neoadjuvant therapy are also needed in order to define the role of postoperative chemotherapy in the multimodal treatment of resectable rectal cancer.

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer operated for cure

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in the Western world. Apart from surgery - which remains the mainstay of treatment for resectable primary tumours - postoperative (i.e., adjuvant) chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based regimens is now the standard treatment in Dukes' C (TNM stage III) colon tumours i.e. tumours with metastases in the regional lymph nodes but no distant metastases. In contrast, the evidence for recommendations of adjuvant therapy in rectal cancer is sparse. In Europe it is generally acknowledged that locally advanced rectal tumours receive preoperative (i.e., neoadjuvant) downstaging by radiotherapy (or chemoradiotion), whereas in the US postoperative chemoradiotion is considered the treatment of choice in all Dukes' C rectal cancers. Overall, no universal consensus exists on the adjuvant treatment of surgically resectable rectal carcinoma; moreover, no formal systematic review and meta-analysis has been so far performed on this subject.

OBJECTIVES

We undertook a systematic review of the scientific literature from 1975 until March 2011 in order to quantitatively summarize the available evidence regarding the impact of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on the survival of patients with surgically resectable rectal cancer. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

SEARCH METHODS

CCCG standard search strategy in defined databases with the following supplementary search. 1. Rect* or colorect* - 2. Cancer or carcinom* or adenocarc* or neoplasm* or tumour - 3. Adjuv* - 4. Chemother* - 5. Postoper*

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer who received no adjuvant chemotherapy with those receiving any postoperative chemotherapy regimen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data and a third author performed an independent search for verification. The main outcome measure was the hazard ratio (HR) between the risk of event between the treatment arm (adjuvant chemotherapy) and the control arm (no adjuvant chemotherapy). The survival data were either entered directly in RevMan or extrapolated from Kaplan-Meier plots and then entered in RevMan. Due to expected clinical heterogeneity a random effects model was used for creating the pooled estimates of treatment efficacy.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 21 eligible RCTs were identified and used for meta-analysis purposes. Overall, 16,215 patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled, 9,785 being affected with rectal carcinoma. Considering patients with rectal cancer only, 4,854 cases were randomized to receive potentially curative surgery of the primary tumour plus adjuvant chemotherapy and 4,367 to receive surgery plus observation. The mean number of patients enrolled was 466 (range: 54-1,243 cases). 11 RCTs had been performed in Western countries and 10 in Japan. All trials used fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy (no modern drugs - such as oxaliplatin, irinotecan or biological agents - were tested).Overall survival (OS) data were available in 21 RCTs and the data available for meta-analysis regarded 9,221 patients: of these, 4854 patients were randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,367 patients did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a significant reduction in the risk of death (17%) among patients undergoing postoperative chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.83, CI: 0.76-0.91). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=30%) but significant (P=0.09) at the 10% alpha level.Disease-free survival (DFS) data were reported in 20 RCTs, and the data suitable for meta-analysis included 8,530 patients. Of these, 4,515 patients were randomized to postoperative chemotherapy (treatment arm) and 4,015 patients received no postoperative chemotherapy (control arm). The meta-analysis of these RCTs showed a reduction in the risk of disease recurrence (25%) among patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy as compared to those undergoing observation (HR=0.75, CI: 0.68-0.83). Between-study heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared=41%) but significant (P=0.03).While analyzing both OS and DFS data, sensitivity analyses did not find any difference in treatment effect based on trial sample size or geographical region (Western vs Japanese). Available data were insufficient to investigate on the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy separately in different TNM stages in terms of both OS and DFS. No plausible source of heterogeneity was formally identified, although variability in treatment regimens and TNM stages of enrolled patients might have played a significant role in the difference of reported results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis support the use of 5-FU based postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients undergoing apparently radical surgery for non-metastatic rectal carcinoma. Available data do not allow us to define whether the efficacy of this treatment is highest in one specific TNM stage. The implementation of modern anti-cancer agents in the adjuvant setting is warranted to improve the results shown by this meta-analysis. Randomized trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients receiving preoperative neoadjuvant therapy are also needed in order to define the role of postoperative chemotherapy in the multimodal treatment of resectable rectal cancer.

A pilot feasibility study of TNFerade™ biologic with capecitabine and radiation therapy followed by surgical resection for the treatment of rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and tolerability of weekly intratumoral TNFerade™ injections combined with concurrent capecitabine and radiotherapy in the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with T3, T4, or N+ rectal cancer received radiotherapy to a total dose of 50.4-54 Gy in combination with capecitabine 937.5 mg/m(2) p.o. b.i.d. TNFerade™ at a dose of 4 × 10(10) particle units was injected into the rectal tumor on the first day of radiotherapy and weekly for a total of 5 injections. Surgery was performed 5-10 weeks after the completion of chemoradiation.

RESULTS

Nine patients were enrolled in this pilot trial. The stage was cT2 in 2 patients, cT3 in 6 patients, cT4 in 1 patient, N- in 7 patients and N+ in 2 patients. Eight patients completed all treatments. Grade 3 hematologic toxicity was observed in 2 patients. There was no toxicity directly attributable to the injection procedure. A complete pathologic response was observed in 2 of 9 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the feasibility of weekly intratumoral TNFerade™ injections during chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Pathologic responses with this combination compare favorably to published rates.

Preoperative intensified radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer: experience of a single institution

PURPOSE

The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and the effectiveness of an intensified neoadjuvant protocol with the addition of weekly oxaliplatin in the preoperative strategy of rectal cancer treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer received continous infusion 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) 200 mg/m(2)/day in combination with weekly oxaliplatin at a dose of 50 mg/m(2). Doses of radiotherapy were 45 Gy to the whole pelvis plus 5.4-9 Gy to the tumour mass. The primary end-points of the study were evaluation of toxicity, compliance with radiotherapy and chemotherapy, downstaging, pathological complete response (pCR) and the rate of sphincter preservation for distal cancers. Secondary end-points were relapse-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

From November 2006 to June 2009, 51 patients were enrolled into the study. Compliance with chemotherapy was 80%. The incidence of G3 diarrhoea and proctitis were 17.6% and 21.5%, respectively. Surgery was performed in 48 patients with 100% R0 resection. 76.4% of low-lying tumours underwent conservative treatment. Seventy-nine percent of patients were downstaged: T and N downstaging were observed in 71% and 75% of patients, respectively. A pCR was obtained in 11 (22.9%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensification of neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer with the addition of weekly oxaliplatin is feasible, with remarkable rates of downstaging and pathological complete response. Data on sphincter preservation for distal cancers were excellent. Phase III trials with a longer follow-up will establish whether this good outcome in terms of surrogate end-points will translate into better rates of disease-free and overall survival.

Adoption of preoperative radiation therapy for rectal cancer from 2000 to 2006: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Patterns-of-Care Study

PURPOSE

The German rectal study determined that preoperative radiation therapy (RT) as a component of combined-modality therapy decreased local tumor recurrence, increased sphincter preservation, and decreased treatment toxicity compared with postoperative RT for rectal cancer. We evaluated the use of preoperative RT after the presentation of the landmark German rectal study results and examined the impact of tumor and sociodemographic factors on receiving preoperative RT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In total, 20,982 patients who underwent surgical resection for T3-T4 and/or node-positive rectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2000 through 2006 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results tumor registries. We analyzed trends in preoperative RT use before and after publication of the findings from the German rectal study. We also performed multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with receiving preoperative RT.

RESULTS

Among those treated with RT, the proportion of patients treated with preoperative RT increased from 33.3% in 2000 to 63.8% in 2006. After adjustment for age; gender; race/ethnicity; marital status; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry; county-level education; T stage; N stage; tumor size; and tumor grade, there was a significant association between later year of diagnosis and an increase in preoperative RT use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26/y increase; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-1.29). When we compared the years before and after publication of the German rectal study (2000-2003 vs. 2004-2006), patients were more likely to receive preoperative RT than postoperative RT in 2004-2006 (adjusted odds ratio, 2.35; 95% confidence interval, 2.13-2.59). On multivariate analysis, patients who were older, who were female, and who resided in counties with lower educational levels had significantly decreased odds of receiving preoperative RT.

CONCLUSIONS

After the publication of the landmark German rectal study, there was widespread, rapid adoption of preoperative RT for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, preoperative RT may be underused in certain sociodemographic groups.

Do all locally advanced rectal cancers require radiation? A review of literature in the modern era

Potentially curable rectal cancer is primarily treated with surgical resection. Adjuvant or neoadjuvant radiotherapy is often utilized for patients deemed to be at unacceptable risk for local recurrence. The purpose of this article is to review the pertinent literature and elucidate the role of radiotherapy in patients with an intermediate risk of local recurrence. The addition of chemoradiotherapy is recommended in the majority of patients with transmural or node positive rectal cancer. However, some patients with favorable characteristics may have only a small incremental benefit from the addition of radiotherapy. The decision to treat or not to treat should take into consideration the patient and physician tolerance of risk of recurrence and risk of treatment related toxicity. The primary factors identified for determining low risk patients are circumferential radial margin (CRM), location within the rectum, and nodal status. Patients at lowest risk have widely negative CRM (>2mm), proximal lesions (>10cm from the anal verge), and no nodal disease. Patients with all three low risk factors have an absolute reduction in local recurrence that is <5% and may be eligible to forego radiotherapy. Additional factors identified which may impact local recurrence risk are elevated serum CEA level, lymphovascular space invasion, pathologic grade, and extramural space invasion.

The role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Synchronous liver metastases are detected in approximately 25% of colorectal cancer patients at diagnosis. The rates of local failure and distant metastasis are substantial in these patients, even after undergoing aggressive treatments including resection of primary and metastatic liver tumors. The purpose of this study was to determine whether adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy is beneficial for pelvic control and overall survival in rectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis after primary tumor resection.

METHODS

Among rectal cancer patients who received total mesorectal excision (TME) between 1997 and 2006 at Yonsei University Health System, eighty-nine patients diagnosed with synchronous liver metastasis were reviewed. Twenty-seven patients received adjuvant pelvic RT (group S + R), and sixty-two patients were managed without RT (group S). Thirty-six patients (58%) in group S and twenty patients (74%) in group S+R received local treatment for liver metastasis. Failure patterns and survival outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Pelvic failure was observed in twenty-five patients; twenty-one patients in group S (34%), and four patients in group S+R (15%) (p = 0.066). The two-year pelvic failure-free survival rates (PFFS) of group S and group S+R were 64.8% and 80.8% (p = 0.028), respectively, and the two-year overall survival rates (OS) were 49.1% and 70.4% (p = 0.116), respectively. In a subgroup analysis of fifty-six patients who received local treatment for liver metastasis, the two-year PFFS were 64.9% and 82.9% (p = 0.05), respectively; the two-year OS were 74.1% and 80.0% (p = 0.616) in group S (n = 36) and group S+R (n = 20), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant pelvic RT significantly reduced the pelvic failure rate but its influence on overall survival was unclear. Rectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis may benefit from adjuvant pelvic RT through an increased pelvic control rate and improved quality of life.

Local excision after preoperative chemoradiation results in an equivalent outcome to total mesorectal excision in selected patients with T3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We previously reported 26 patients who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CXRT) for T3 rectal cancer and were subsequently offered full-thickness local excision (LE) as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME). At nearly 4 years' follow-up, no difference in outcome was observed. This study compares outcomes in a larger cohort of patients and reevaluates the original 26 patients after longer follow-up.

METHODS

Retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent preoperative CXRT (radiation doses of 45, 50.4, or 52.5 Gy with concurrent 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) followed by surgery for T3 rectal cancer. Forty-seven patients underwent LE (Kraske [n = 6] or transanal excision [n = 41]). 473 patients underwent TME (abdominoperineal resection [n = 141] or low anterior resection [n = 332]). Local recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival, and overall survival (OS) rates were compared.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 63 months for the LE group and 59 months for the TME group. Twenty-three LE patients (49%) had a complete response to CXRT, 17 (36%) had microscopic residual disease, and 7 (15%) had gross residual disease, compared with 108 (23%), 89 (19%), and 276 (58%) TME patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between the 10-year actuarial local recurrence rate for the LE group versus the TME group (10.6% and 7.6%, respectively; P = .52), and no significant difference in DFS, disease-specific survival, or OS rates between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients who demonstrate an excellent response to preoperative CXRT for T3 rectal cancer, full-thickness LE offers comparable local control, DFS, and OS to that achieved with proctectomy and TME.

Double blind randomized phase II study with radiation+5-fluorouracil+/-celecoxib for resectable rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and efficacy of the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib in conjunction with preoperative chemoradiation for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer in a double blind randomized phase II study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients of the initially planned 80 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were treated with preoperative radiation (45 Gy; 1.8 Gy/fraction, 5 days/week) combined with 5-fluorouracil (continuous infusion, 225 mg/m(2)/day) and celecoxib (2 x 400 mg/day) or placebo. Pathological response and toxicity of study treatment were evaluated, as well as expression of COX-2 and Ki67 in tumor tissue and IL-6 in plasma as possible molecular correlates and predictors of response to treatment.

RESULTS

Patients treated with celecoxib tended to show a better response (61%) when compared to those treated with placebo (35%), although not significant (p=0.13). T-downstaging and N-downstaging were also slightly higher with celecoxib. Plasma IL-6 levels and intratumoral COX2 or Ki67 were altered by chemoradiation, but were not further altered by celecoxib treatment and therefore not useful for prediction of treatment benefit. Celecoxib therapy in conjunction with chemoradiation was not associated with additional toxicity and seemed to help mitigate therapy-related pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of celecoxib to preoperative chemoradiation is feasible for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. To study the individual effect of COX-2 inhibitors on pathological response phase III studies are required.

Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer. However, improvements in surgery and histopathological assessment mean that the role of radiotherapy needs to be reassessed. We compared short-course preoperative radiotherapy versus initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

We undertook a randomised trial in 80 centres in four countries. 1350 patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum were randomly assigned, by a minimisation procedure, to short-course preoperative radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions; n=674) or to initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions with concurrent 5-fluorouracil) restricted to patients with involvement of the circumferential resection margin (n=676). The primary outcome measure was local recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842.

FINDINGS

At the time of analysis, which included all participants, 330 patients had died (157 preoperative radiotherapy group vs 173 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy), and median follow-up of surviving patients was 4 years. 99 patients had developed local recurrence (27 preoperative radiotherapy vs 72 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We noted a reduction of 61% in the relative risk of local recurrence for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.27-0.58, p<0.0001), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6.2% (95% CI 5.3-7.1) (4.4% preoperative radiotherapy vs 10.6% selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We recorded a relative improvement in disease-free survival of 24% for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.94, p=0.013), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6.0% (95% CI 5.3-6.8) (77.5%vs 71.5%). Overall survival did not differ between the groups (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73-1.13, p=0.40).

INTERPRETATION

Taken with results from other randomised trials, our findings provide convincing and consistent evidence that short-course preoperative radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with operable rectal cancer.

Molecular and clinico-pathological markers in rectal cancer: a tissue micro-array study

AIMS

The aims of the study were to study the effect of pre-operative treatment on the expression of tumour-related proteins and to correlate the expression of these proteins with response and survival of patients with advanced rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Tissue micro-arrays from pre- and post-treatment biopsies of 99 patients with rectal cancer treated with pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy were stained for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), carbonic anhydrase IX, Ki67, vascular endothelial growth factor, cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX-2) and cleaved cytokeratin 18 (c-CK18). Also, fibro-inflammatory alterations after treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS

Pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy caused fibro-inflammatory changes, a downregulation of proliferation (Ki67) and EGFR and an upregulation of apoptosis (cleaved CK18). Patients with a good regression during pre-operative treatment showed less proliferating and apoptotic cells in the resection specimen. Multivariate analysis showed that T downstaging, fibro-inflammatory changes in the resection specimen and COX-2 expression in the biopsy correlated with overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-operative treatment has an effect on proliferation, apoptosis, inflammation and EGFR expression. The classical clinical parameters as well as fibro-inflammatory changes and COX-2 expression seem most valuable as predictors for survival.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria on resectable rectal cancer: expert panel on radiation oncology--rectal/anal cancer

In what arguably may be the most pivotal recent trial in the area of resectable rectal cancer management, a randomized trial from Germany has established a regimen of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and surgery followed by additional cycles of chemotherapy alone as the standard of care for clinical stages T3 or T4, or for node-positive rectal cancer. Other clinical studies from the United States, Europe, and Asia have also influenced the treatment strategies of operable rectal cancer, as various approaches using preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy, have been examined. A summary of the major randomized clinical trials spanning the past several decades is provided.

Prognostic Factors Affecting Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer and Clinical Significance of Hemoglobin

PURPOSE

To investigate potential prognostic factors, including hemoglobin levels before and during radiotherapy, for associations with survival and local control in patients with unirradiated locally recurrent rectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten potential prognostic factors were investigated in 94 patients receiving radiotherapy for recurrent rectal cancer: age (<or=68 vs. >or=69 years), gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0-1 vs. 2-3), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage (<or=II vs. III vs. IV), grading (G1-2 vs. G3), surgery, administration of chemotherapy, radiation dose (equivalent dose in 2-Gy fractions: <or=50 vs. >50 Gy), and hemoglobin levels before (<12 vs. >or=12 g/dL) and during (majority of levels: <12 vs. >or=12 g/dL) radiotherapy. Multivariate analyses were performed, including hemoglobin levels, either before or during radiotherapy (not both) because these are confounding variables.

RESULTS

Improved survival was associated with better performance status (p<0.001), lower AJCC stage (p=0.023), surgery (p=0.011), chemotherapy (p=0.003), and hemoglobin levels>or=12 g/dL both before (p=0.031) and during (p<0.001) radiotherapy. On multivariate analyses, performance status, AJCC stage, and hemoglobin levels during radiotherapy maintained significance. Improved local control was associated with better performance status (p=0.040), lower AJCC stage (p=0.010), lower grading (p=0.012), surgery (p<0.001), chemotherapy (p<0.001), and hemoglobin levels>or=12 g/dL before (p<0.001) and during (p<0.001) radiotherapy. On multivariate analyses, chemotherapy, grading, and hemoglobin levels before and during radiotherapy remained significant. Subgroup analyses of the patients having surgery demonstrated the extent of resection to be significantly associated with local control (p=0.011) but not with survival (p=0.45).

CONCLUSION

Predictors for outcome in patients who received radiotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer were performance status, AJCC stage, chemotherapy, surgery, extent of resection, histologic grading, and hemoglobin levels both before and during radiotherapy.

The role of radiation therapy for colorectal cancer

Radiation therapy (RT) has been used to treat cancers for more than a century. Recent randomized trials have helped clarify the treatment recommendations in the use of RT for colorectal cancers. This article reviews these trials to illustrate key concepts, places these trials in perspective, and provides direction for future research.

Biomarkers for radiation-induced small bowel epithelial damage: An emerging role for plasma Citrulline

Reduction of cancer treatment-induced mucosal injury has been recognized as an important target for improving the therapeutic ratio as well as reducing the economic burden associated with these treatment related sequellae. Clinical studies addressing this issue are hampered by the fact that specific objective parameters, which enable monitoring of damage in routine clinical practice, are lacking. This review summarizes pros and cons of currently available endpoints for intestinal injury. The metabolic background and characteristics of plasma citrulline, a recently investigated biomarker specifically for small intestinal injury, are discussed in more detail.

Differences in toxicity across gender in patients treated with chemoradiation for rectal cancer

The primary objective was to prospectively investigate the efficacy and toxicity of bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemotherapy compared with the infusional 5-FU in combination with preoperative radiation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Furthermore, in light of previous reports, toxicity profiles between men and women were also compared. Eighty-four consecutive patients with rectal adenocarcinoma were prospectively treated. There were no differences in tumour response, local recurrence or survival between bolus versus infusional groups or gender groups. In locally advanced rectal cancer, preoperative infusional chemotherapy combined with radiation was found to be less toxic than bolus chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Both regimens produced more toxic effects in women compared with men.

Negative influence of delayed surgery on survival after preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

In Europe, until recently the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer was preoperative radiotherapy (RT). The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence on survival of intervals between diagnosis and treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The influence on survival of intervals between diagnosis and surgery (Dg-Surg), diagnosis and initiation of RT (Dg-Rad), and completion of RT and surgery (Rad-Surg) was evaluated in a retrospective series of patients treated with preoperative RT. Between 1991 and 1998, 102 patients received treatment with preoperative RT without concomitant chemotherapy at the René Gauducheau Cancer Center. Patients generally received 45 Gy (80%) in 25 fractions over 35 days for T2-T3-T4 N0-N1 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma located mainly (62.7%) in the lower third of the rectum (< or = 5 cm from anal margin). Thirty-five pN1 patients were treated with postoperative chemotherapy. Differences between survival were assessed by the log-rank test, and prognostic factors by the Cox test.

RESULTS

Median time was 14.7 weeks for Dg-Surg, 4.6 weeks for Dg-Rad and 5.1 weeks for Rad-Surg. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 57.4 months. Five-year local relapse-free survival was 83.9%, metastasis-free survival 64% and overall survival 60.8%. No factor was predictive of tumour response to RT. Log-rank and multivariate analysis showed that overall survival was significantly influenced by lower-third tumours, pT, pN and Dg-Surg (poorer survival when > or = 16 weeks: OR = 2.59, P = 0.005). Metastasis-free survival correlated significantly with Dg-Surg (> or = 16 weeks: OR = 2.05, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

An interval of more than 16 weeks between diagnosis and surgery may reduce overall survival of patients treated with preoperative RT for locally advanced rectal cancer. Surgery should be performed shortly after completion of RT for patients with no possibility of sphincter preservation, or a minimal risk of morbidity from an abdominoperineal excision.

Pre-operative combined modality therapy in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer

AIMS

To review the use of pre-operative combined modality therapy (CMT, chemotherapy with radiotherapy) in the management of resectable rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on pre-operative CMT and rectal cancer. Additional information was retrieved from hand searching the literature and from relevant congress proceedings. We addressed the following issues: Phase II studies of pre-operative CMT, pre-operative radiotherapy (RT) alone vs pre-operative CMT, pre-operative vs post-operative CMT, functional outcome and pathologic downstaging after CMT, prediction and importance of complete response to CMT.

RESULTS

Pre-operative CMT results in an average pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 18.5% in Phase II studies. Compared with pre-operative RT alone, the addition of CT significantly improves tumour response but not overall survival while acute toxicity increases and the effect on sphincter preservation is at present unclear. Pre-operative CMT has been proven to be superior to post-operative CMT in a German multicenter randomized trial. The scarce available data suggest that the addition of CT might worsen anorectal function compared to pre-operative RT alone. Although a significant pathological response is prognostically favourable, the clinical and imaging tools available at present do not allow to accurately predict pCR in clinical complete responders confirming the indication for surgery in this subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-operative CMT enhances tumour response and could therefore, have a role in patients with possibly invaded resection margins or low lying cancers, although both acute toxicity and anorectal function are worse compared to RT alone. The final results of ongoing randomized trials will more accurately establish the role of pre-operative CMT in resectable rectal cancer patients.

Radiation therapy and combined modality treatment of gastrointestinal carcinomas

BACKGROUND

Ionizing radiation (IR) is a potent agent in enhancing tumor control of locally advanced cancer and has been shown to improve disease-free and overall survival in several entities. However, the role of radiotherapy (RT) in the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors remains controversial because of the marked radiation sensitivity of neighboring organs frequently compromising application of high doses of ionizing radiation.

METHODS

The Medline and the Cochrane Library from 1980 until 2005 were searched using subject heading (MeSH) terms including "esophageal neoplasm", "gastric neoplasm", "pancreatic neoplasm" and "rectal neoplasm", in combination with the subheadings "radiotherapy", "chemotherapy". The term, "randomized controlled trial", was used to identify randomized trials. The proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology from 1999 to 2004 and the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology from 1999 until 2005 were searched. Ongoing trials were identified through the Physician Data Query database (www.cancer.gov/search/clinical_trials).

RESULTS

RT in combination with surgery enhances tumor control of locally advanced cancer disease and has been shown to improve disease-free and overall survival in rectal cancer. In esophageal adenocarcinoma, survival was prolonged with pre-operative chemo-radiation in a meta-analysis. In gastric cancer, post-operative chemo-radiation can be considered after limited lymphadenectomy. Evidence for improving survival remains to be shown for pancreatic cancer and hepatobiliary carcinoma. In colon cancer, post-operative chemotherapy has proven to prolong survival. The impact of RT seems to be most prominent in the pre-operative setting in patients treated with curative intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-operative RT or pre-operative chemo-radiation may be considered in individual cases, but should not be used routinely for gastro-intestinal carcinoma, except for rectal carcinoma. In many studies, pre-operative radiotherapy/chemo-radiation yielded promising results and merits validation in large controlled trials.

Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer

Over the past five decades, radiotherapy (RT) has become an integral part in the combined modality management of breast cancer. Although its significant effect on local control has been long demonstrated, only recently has adjuvant RT been shown to have a significant effect on breast cancer mortality and overall survival. This article summarizes the adjuvant role of RT after mastectomy and lumpectomy, as well as the rationale and techniques for partial-breast irradiation.

The radiation-induced changes in rectal mucosa: Hyperfractionated vs. hypofractionated preoperative radiation for rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was the qualitative and quantitative evaluation of acute radiation-induced rectal changes in patients who underwent preoperative radiotherapy according to two different irradiation protocols.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-eight patients with rectal adenocarcinoma underwent preoperative radiotherapy; 44 and 24 patients underwent hyperfractionated and hypofractionated protocol, respectively. Fifteen patients treated with surgery alone served as a control group. Five basic histopathologic features (meganucleosis, inflammatory infiltrations, eosinophils, mucus secretion, and erosions) and two additional features (mitotic figures and architectural glandular abnormalities) of radiation-induced changes were qualified and quantified.

RESULTS

Acute radiation-induced reactions were found in 66 patients. The most common were eosinophilic and plasma-cell inflammatory infiltrations (65 patients), erosions, and decreased mucus secretion (54 patients). Meganucleosis and mitotic figures were more common in patients who underwent hyperfractionated radiotherapy. The least common were the glandular architectural distortions, especially in patients treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy. Statistically significant differences in morphologic parameters studied between groups treated with different irradiation protocols were found.

CONCLUSION

The system of assessment is a valuable tool in the evaluation of radiation-induced changes in the rectal mucosa. A greater intensity of regenerative changes was found in patients treated with hyperfractionated radiotherapy.

Quality of systematic reviews used in guidelines for oncology practice

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews are an important tool for developing clinical recommendations. Those of high quality assure a good level of confidence on the strength of the recommendations.

METHODS

A QUOROM-based checklist was applied to the reviews cited in a sample of guidelines on breast and colon cancer prevention and therapy. The checklist provided a weight for each criterion and a total quality score. Each review was independently evaluated by two reviewers; disagreements were solved by consensus.

RESULTS

Eighty reviews (96%) were retrieved and evaluated; 36 focused on breast, and 44 on colorectal cancer. Twenty-three reviews (29%) did not match the definition of systematic review. In 17 (21%) the searching methods were unclear or described elsewhere. Forty (50%) were systematic. Not systematic, low and very low quality reviews accounted for 70% of the total. No review obtained the A+ class score; only 5 (6%) the A- and 7 (9%) the B+.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this assessment provide a sober picture of the quality of the sources used to build guidelines. Oncologists should be aware that they could be relying on poor underlying documents. Writing groups should be aware of methodological problems, and should consult the existing manuals for the preparation of guidelines.

Chemo-radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in the pre-operative treatment of resectable rectal cancer

AIM

To determine the differences in downstaging, local control (LC), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between combined pre-operative chemoradiation and pre-operative radiotherapy alone in the treatment of resectable rectal cancer.

METHODS

One hundred and ten patients who underwent pre-operative radiotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy were reviewed. Fifty-seven patients were treated with radiotherapy (30 Gy/3 Gy) alone and 53 patients with chemo-radiotherapy (bolus 5FU+45 Gy/1.8 Gy). The median interval between the end of neo-adjuvant treatment and surgery was 28 and 46 days for the patients treated with radiotherapy alone and chemo-radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The groups were homogeneously distributed for all characteristics except for cN-stage with more clinically node positive patients in the combined modality treatment group (47 vs 73%). A significant downstaging for tumour and/or lymph node status was observed in both groups. More ypT0-x-is were observed after chemoradiation than after radiotherapy alone (26 vs 7%; p=0.02). The local control rate at 3 years was 94% for both groups. DFS after radiation and chemoradiation was comparable with a 3-year DFS of 83 and 88%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Both pre-operative schemes have similar outcomes concerning DFS, OS and LC. Tumour downstaging is associated with improved survival.

Promising results of a cooperative group phase II trial of preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer (TROG 9801)

PURPOSE

This article reports the overall survival, failure-free survival, local failure, and late radiation toxicity of a phase II trial of preoperative radiotherapy with continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil for rectal cancer after a minimum 3.5 years of follow-up.

METHODS

Eligible patients were those with newly diagnosed localized adenocarcinoma of the rectum, within 12 cm of the anal verge, staged T3-T4 and deemed suitable for curative resection. Radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions in five weeks and three days) was given with continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil throughout the course of radiotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients were accrued in 13 months. The median follow-up time was 4.1 (range, 2.3-4.5) years. There were 55 males (67 percent) and the median age was 59 (range, 27-87) years. Patients were staged pretreatment as T3 (89 percent) and resectable T4 (11 percent). Endorectal ultrasound was performed in 70 percent and magnetic resonance imaging in another 5 percent. The four-year overall and failure-free survival rates were 82 percent (95 percent CI: 72-89) and 69 percent (95 percent CI: 58-78), respectively. The cumulative incidence of local failure at four years was 3.9 percent (95 percent CI: 1.3-11). Risk of failures, local and distant, has not reached a plateau phase.

CONCLUSION

This regimen can be delivered safely and without leading to a significant increase in late toxicity. It provides excellent local control and favorable overall survival. There is a need for longer follow-up than has commonly been used for the proper evaluation of failures after an effective regimen of preoperative chemoradiation.

Posttreatment TNM staging is a prognostic indicator of survival and recurrence in tethered or fixed rectal carcinoma after preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the prognostic value of the posttreatment TNM stage as a predictor of outcome in locally advanced rectal cancers treated with preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 1993 and 2000, 128 patients with tethered (103) or fixed (25) rectal cancers were treated with 50 Gy preoperative pelvic radiotherapy and two cycles of concurrent 5-fluorouracil infusion (20 mg/kg/d) and leucovorin (200 mg/m(2)/d) chemotherapy on Days 1-4 and 22-25 and a single bolus mitomycin C injection (8 mg/m(2)) on Day 1. Of the 128 patients, 111 had Stage T3 and 17 Stage T4 according to the rectal ultrasound or CT findings and clinical evaluation. All 128 patients underwent surgery 8 weeks after chemoradiotherapy. Postoperatively, the disease stage was determined according to the surgical and pathologic findings using the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system.

RESULTS

Of the 128 patients, 32 had postchemoradiotherapy (pCR) Stage 0 (T0N0M0), 37 pCR Stage I, 26 pCR Stage II, 28 pCR Stage III, and 5 pCR Stage IV disease. Of the 128 patients, 79 had pCR Stage T0-T2, 35 pCR Stage T3, and 14 pCR Stage T4. The rate of T stage downstaging was 66% (84 of 128). Of the 128 patients, 25% achieved a pathologic complete response, and 31 (24%) had positive nodal disease. Lymphovascular or perineural invasion was found in 13 patients (10%). The 5-year disease-specific survival rate was 97% for pCR Stage 0, 88% for pCR Stage I, 74% for pCR Stage II, 44% for pCR Stage III, and 0% for pCR Stage IV (p = 0.0000059). The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 97% for pCR Stage 0, 80% for pCR Stage I, 72% for pCR Stage II, 42% for pCR Stage III, and 0% for pCR Stage IV (p < 0.000001). In univariate analysis, the pretreatment tumor status (fixed vs. tethered tumors), the pCR TNM stage, T stage downstaging, pathologic T4 tumors, node-positive disease after chemoradiotherapy, and lymphovascular or perineural invasion were statistically significant prognosticators of disease-specific survival and relapse-free survival. pCR Stage T4 disease was a strong predictor of local recurrence. The 5-year local control rate was 98% for pCR T0-T2, 89% for pCR T3, and 65% for pCR T4 disease (p = 0.00044). In multivariate analysis, the pCR TNM stage was the most statistically significant independent predictor of survival (p = 0.003) and relapse-free survival (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For patients who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, the pCR TNM stage was a strong prognosticator of recurrence and survival. It can be used to identify high-risk patients for additional postoperative therapy.

Prevention and therapy of colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is expected to affect more than 146,000 and kill more than 57,000 Americans in 2004. Increased understanding of carcinogenesis is transforming clinical approaches to all stages of this disease. During the last 5 years, four new drugs have been approved for colorectal cancer treatment, and substantial progress has been made in identifying and developing agents that prevent or delay carcinogenesis. These advances substantiate target-driven approaches to cancer prevention and treatment, and provide fruitful opportunities for future investigations.

A phase I trial of preoperative radiotherapy and capecitabine for locally advanced, potentially resectable rectal cancer

The purpose of the study was to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of oral capecitabine, combined with concurrent, standard preoperative pelvic radiotherapy, when given twice daily, from Monday to Friday throughout the course of radiotherapy, for locally advanced potentially resectable rectal cancer. Maximum-tolerated dose was defined as the total (given in two equally divided doses) oral dose of capecitabine that caused treatment-related grade 3 or 4 toxicity in one-third or more of the patients treated. Radiotherapy involved 50.4 Gy given in 28 fractions in 5 weeks and 3 days. Eligible patients had a newly diagnosed clinical stage T3–4 N0–2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma located within 12 cm of the anal verge suitable for curative resection. Surgery was performed 4–6 weeks from completion of preoperative chemoradiotherapy. In all, 28 patients were enrolled in the study at predefined dose levels: 850 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=3), 1000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=6), 1250 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=3), 1650 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=3), 1800 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=8) and 2000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (n=5). The mean age was 62.3 years (range: 33–80 years). Five patients were female and 23 male. The median distance of tumour from the anal verge was 6 cm (range: 1–11 cm). Endorectal ultrasound was performed in 93% of patients. A total of 26 patients (93%) had T3 disease and two patients had resectable T4 disease. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) developed in one patient at dose level 1000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ (RTOG grade 3 cystitis). Two of the five patients at dose level 2000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ had a total of three DLT (grade 3 perineal skin reaction, grade 3 diarrhoea and grade 3 dehydration). Dose escalation of capecitabine was ceased at 2000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ after reaching MTD. None of the eight patients at dose level 1800 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ developed DLT. All except one patient underwent surgery. A total of 15 patients had the clinical T stage reduced by at least one stage in pathologic specimens. Five patients (19%) achieved a pathologic complete response. We conclude that the MTD of capecitabine was reached at a dose level of 2000 mg m⁻² day⁻¹, given as 1000 mg m⁻² twice daily, from Monday to Friday throughout the course of preoperative pelvic irradiation of 50.4 Gy. For patients with resectable rectal cancer receiving concurrent, full dose radiotherapy, the recommended dose of capecitabine for further study is 1800 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ when given in this schedule.

Comparison of Different External Beam Treatment Techniques to Deliver High-Dose Irradiation to Local Recurrent Rectal Carcinoma

Aims and background

Treatment of local-regional recurrent rectal carcinoma is a challenging problem, and local control may be dose dependent; doses should probably exceed 60 Gy. Our aim was to verify the possibility to deliver 66 Gy to the target, but less than 35 Gy to the small bowel, comparing different 3D irradiation techniques, in a selected group of patients.

Methods

Five patients with local recurrent rectal carcinoma were selected as representative of different presentations of the disease. Gross tumor volume and clinical target volume were defined [by RS]. Tumors ranged between 182 and 540 cc, and small bowel volumes between 748 and 1050 cc. A three-field technique, coplanar multiple fields, noncoplanar fields and a proton beam were compared using dose volume histograms. A positive result was scored when ≥90% of the target received the prescribed dose with no more than 5% of the small bowel receiving more than 35 Gy. Doses were escalated in steps of 2 Gy from 60 to 66 Gy.

Results

The number of plans fitting the constraints were 7/19, 11/19, 18/19 for doses of 66 Gy, 64 Gy and 62 Gy, respectively. The stage of the tumor did not seem to correlate with the possibility to homogeneously cover the target with the prescribed dose.

Conclusions

Simple coplanar and complex coplanar techniques (up to six fields), positioning the patient in a prone position with dislocation of the bowel, seem to be the best solutions to treat almost all of the patients with doses of 64 Gy. Where higher doses are concerned, it is not possible to suggest a “standard” solution. More personalized techniques have to be tested to define the best option.

How Safe is Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer?

Over the last three decades, a series of clinical trials have led to the use of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy and chemotherapy in high-risk (T3-4 or N1) rectal cancer. There is a need to improve patient selection in order to identify the group most at risk for recurrent disease. The toxicity of adjuvant therapy should be factored into this consideration. The optimal sequencing of adjuvant therapy before or after surgery, the use of short- or long-course radiotherapy, and the utility of concurrent chemotherapy is currently being examined in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of this report was to review the morbidity and mortality in all RCTs of adjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.

Chemoradiation with novel agents for rectal cancer

Surgery remains the mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer. Although the role of radiation therapy in colon cancer is unclear, its role in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer has been extensively studied in clinical trials. The use of postoperative chemoradiotherapy has been shown to improve local control and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced disease over surgery alone; however, an overall survival advantage remains unproven. Clinical trials evaluating preoperative radiotherapy have demonstrated an improved local control as well as a survival advantage. Randomized studies comparing preoperative versus postoperative combined-modality approaches have failed in the United States, mainly due to the perceived advantages of preoperative treatment: improved patient tolerance, tumor downstaging, and fewer treatment-related complications. While 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy remains the standard systemic agent used along with radiation, other novel agents and strategies have recently been developed and are under investigation. In this review, we discuss the use of novel anticancer agents in combination with radiation therapy for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

The role of radiotherapy in rectal cancer

In Europe, short-term radiotherapy is increasingly used in the primary management of rectal cancer. In the United States, postoperative chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment of choice. The rationale and indications for radiotherapy and possible combinations with chemotherapy are discussed and an overview of all of the randomised trials containing radiotherapy as one randomisation arm is given. Three major indications for radiotherapy can be identified: the reduction of local recurrences in mobile rectal cancer, downstaging of the tumour in primary irresectable tumours and downsizing of low-lying tumours in attempts to more frequently perform a sphincter-saving procedure. For reduction of local recurrences, radiotherapy can be given either pre- or postoperatively, although preoperative therapy is more dose-efficient. Short-term preoperative radiotherapy reduces the number of recurrences and improves survival. Improved survival is also reported after postoperative radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy, however, the relevance of the radiotherapy component is discussed. Although the debate about radiotherapy is still ongoing, we strongly believe that the results demonstrate that short-term preoperative radiotherapy is the treatment of choice for resectable rectal cancer.

Emerging standards of radiotherapy combined with radical rectal cancer surgery

For patients with resectable rectal cancer treated with total mesorectal excision, the routine use of radiotherapy should be omitted for stage I of the disease and for lesions located higher than 10 cm from the anal verge. Preoperative radiotherapy may be considered for all patients with a lesion with deep perirectal fat infiltration located in the lower two thirds of the rectum. The other option is to offer postoperative radiotherapy for patients with a positive surgical margin, N+ stage disease, mesorectal tumour implants, high tumour grade, perineural invasion, extramuscular blood and lymphatic vessel invasion and with inadvertent tumour perforation. The lower risk of small bowel damage and probable higher efficacy are arguments for the use of preoperative radiotherapy instead of postoperative radiotherapy. The impairment of anorectal function appears to be most frequent late postirradiation sequel. The analysis of acute complications (including toxic deaths) compliance, cost and convenience favours 5 x 5 Gy preoperative irradiation with immediate surgery for patients with resectable tumours in comparison to other commonly used schemes of radiotherapy. These advantages should be weighed against approximately 1.5% risk of late neurotoxicity. There is no clear answer to the question whether preoperative conventional radio(chemo)therapy offers an advantage in sphincter preservation. To answer this question, the results of two ongoing randomised trials are awaited. For patients with unresectable cancers, long-term preoperative radio(chemo)therapy with delayed surgery is a preferable scheme. The total mesorectal irradiation should be employed for mid- and low-lying lesions. Therefore, during radiotherapy planning, a contrast enema should be used to identify the anorectal ring, anatomically corresponding with the lowest edge of the mesorectum.

GP letter writing in colorectal cancer: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The usual mode of communication with the specialist in the UK is a referral letter. Letters now primarily document the GPs' concerns for the patient and are no longer required to persuade the specialist to offer an appointment. The content of referral letters from GPs has failed to satisfy specialists responding to a series of surveys. Evidence suggests that GPs who improve their letters to specialists also refer more cases with significant pathology.

AIMS

The aims of this research are to explore the factors that may influence GPs in writing the referral letter when consulting patients presenting with lower bowel symptoms.

METHODS

A convenience sample of twelve GPs was interviewed in Nottinghamshire and inner city Sheffield practices. A framework approach was utilised in the analysis of data. Data from the interviews followed the prescribed steps, including: familiarisation, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting and mapping, and interpretation.

RESULTS

The thematic framework reflected four major themes. These were: (1) the nature and content of referral letters, (2) knowledge about colorectal cancer, (3) issues relating to the quality of referral letters in colorectal cases and (4) factors that effect the use of guidelines for referral.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs only have very short consultations in which to address many and complex issues. Pre-referral assessment in colorectal cases includes intimate examination of the patient. Therefore the writing of the letter of referral is often postponed until long after the patient has left the GP's office. Some GPs do not believe the consultant reads the letter of referral. However, GPs are keen to provide best care and welcome feedback about the quality of their letters. They acknowledge the responsibility to communicate with colleagues effectively and have differing ideas about what constitutes an adequate referral letter.

Adjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic overview of 8,507 patients from 22 randomised trials

BACKGROUND

At least 28 randomised, controlled trials have compared outcomes of surgery for rectal cancer combined with preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy with those of surgery alone. We have done a collaborative meta-analysis of these results to give a more balanced view of the total evidence and to increase statistical precision.

METHODS

We centrally checked and analysed individual patient data from 22 randomised comparisons between preoperative (6,350 patients in 14 trials) or postoperative (2157 in eight trials) radiotherapy and no radiotherapy for rectal cancer.

FINDINGS

Overall survival was only marginally better in patients who were allocated to radiotherapy than in those allocated to surgery alone (62% vs 63% died; p=0.06). Rates of apparently curative resection were not improved by preoperative radiotherapy (85% radiotherapy vs 86% control). Yearly risk of local recurrence was 46% (SE 6) lower in those who had preoperative radiotherapy than in those who had surgery alone (p=0.00001), and 37% (10) lower in those who had postoperative treatment than those who had surgery alone (p=0.002). Fewer patients who had preoperative radiotherapy died from rectal cancer than did those who had surgery alone (45% vs 50%, respectively, p=0.0003), but early (</=1 year after treatment) deaths from other causes increased (8% vs 4% died, p<0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

Preoperative radiotherapy (at biologically effective doses >/=30 Gy) reduces risk of local recurrence and death from rectal cancer. If safety can be improved without compromising effectiveness, then overall survival would be moderately improved by use of preoperative radiotherapy, especially for young, high risk patients. Postoperative radiotherapy also reduces local recurrence, but short preoperative radiation schedules seem to be at least as effective as longer schedules.

Postoperative pelvic radiotherapy with or without elective irradiation of para-aortic nodes and liver in rectal cancer patients. A controlled clinical trial of the EORTC Radiotherapy Group

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this randomized multicenter study was to assess the impact on disease free and overall survival of low dose irradiation to para-aortic nodes and liver in patients with a locally advanced resected rectal cancer receiving a 50 Gy postoperative pelvic radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Main inclusion criteria were: a curative resection for a histologically proved carcinoma of the rectum, Gunderson-Sosin stages B2-B3, C1-C3, age <70 years. The patients were randomized between pelvic irradiation (Lim-XRT): 50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks and extended irradiation (Ext-XRT): same scheme/doses in the pelvis and extended fields on para-aortic nodes and liver, delivering 25 Gy in 19 fractions over 25 days. From 1983 to 1992, 484 patients were enrolled by 18 EORTC institutions and 29 patients were ineligible. The end-points were local and distant relapses, toxicity and survival.

RESULTS

Compliance to treatment: 87.2% in Lim-XRT arm and 71.8% in Ext-XRT arm. Moderate acute hematological and hepatic toxicities were significantly increased in Ext-XRT arm. Among 325 patients at risk, 44 suffered a severe intestinal complication requiring surgery in 29. The 5- and 10-year estimates of disease free survival were respectively 42 and 31% in Lim-XRT arm and 47 and 31% in Ext-XRT arm (ns). The corresponding figures for overall survival were respectively 45 and 40% in Lim-XRT arm and 48 and 37% in Ext-arm (ns). The 10 years estimate of intra-pelvic failures was approximately 30% in both arms. Patients in Ext-arm appeared to have a slight shorter interval free of liver metastases (P=0.047).

CONCLUSION

Low dose irradiation to the para-aortic nodes and liver did not improve survival for patients with resected adenocarcinoma of the rectum.