Long-term oncologic results of patients with distal rectal cancer treated by local excision with or without adjuvant treatment

Can CCRT/RT Achieve Favorable Oncologic Outcome in Rectal Cancer Patients With High Risk Feature After Local Excision?

Purpose

The oncologic outcome of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) after local excision in patients with high-risk early rectal cancer as compared with radical operation has not been reported. The aim of this study is to compare the oncologic outcome between radical operation and adjuvant CCRT after local excision for high-risk early rectal cancer.

Materials and Methods

From January 2005 to December 2015, 266 patients diagnosed with early rectal cancer and treated with local excision who showed high-risk characteristics were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score matching was applied in a ratio of 1:4, comparing the CCRT/radiotherapy (RT) (n = 34) and radical operation (n = 91) groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for survival.

Results

The median follow-up period was 112 months. The 5-year disease-free survival rate and the 5-year overall survival of the radical operation group were significantly higher than those of the CCRT/RT group after propensity score matching (96.7% vs. 70.6%, p <0.001; 100% vs. 91.2%, p = 0.005, respectively). In a multivariate analysis, salvage therapy type and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were prognostic factors for 5-year disease-free survival (p <0.001 and p = 0.021, respectively). The type of salvage therapy, the preoperative CEA, and the pT were prognostic factors for 5-year overall survival (p = 0.009, p = 0.024, and p = 0.046, respectively).

Conclusions

Patients who undergo radical operations after local excision with a high-risk early rectal cancer had better survival than those treated with adjuvant CCRT/RT. Therefore, radical surgery may be recommended to high-risk early rectal cancer patients who have undergone local excision for more favorable oncologic outcomes.

Short- and long-term outcomes of local excision with adjuvant radiotherapy in high-risk T1 rectal cancer patients

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Long-term outcomes of patients with poor prognostic factors following transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer

AIM

Management of early rectal cancer following transanal microscopic anal surgery poses a management dilemma when the histopathology reveals poor prognostic features, due to high risk of local recurrence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the oncological outcomes of such patients who undergo surgery with total mesorectal excision (TME), receive adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy (CRDT/RT) or receive close surveillance only (no further treatment).

METHODS

We identified patients with poor prognostic factors-pT2 adenocarcinoma, poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion (Kikuchi SM3), lymphovascular invasion, tumour budding or R1 resection margin-between 1 September 2012 and 31 January 2020 and report their oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 53 patients, 18 had TME, 14 had CRDT and 14 had RT; seven patients did not have any further treatment. The median follow-up was 48 months, 12 developed recurrence and six died. Overall, 5-year survival (OS) was 88.9% and disease-free survival (DFS) was 79.2%. Compared to the surgical group, in which there were eight recurrences and two deaths, there were zero recurrences or deaths in the CRDT group, log-rank test P = 0.206 for OS and P = 0.005 for DFS. The 5-year survival rates in the RT and surveillance only groups were OS 78.6%, DFS 85.7% and OS 71.5%, DFS 71% respectively. TME assessment in the surgical group revealed Grade 3 quality in seven of the 16 available reports.

CONCLUSION

These findings support the strategy of adjuvant CRDT as first line treatment for patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer with poor prognostic factors on initial histological assessment.

The impact of transanal local excision of early rectal cancer on completion rectal resection without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The impact of transanal local excision (TAE) of early rectal cancer (ERC) on subsequent completion rectal resection (CRR) for unfavorable histology or margin involvement is unclear. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the impact of TAE on CRR in patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature up to March 2020. Medline and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting outcomes of CRR after TAE for ERC. We excluded patients who had neoadjuvant CRT and endoscopic local excision. Surgical, functional, pathological and oncological outcomes were assessed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 353 patients were included. Pathology following TAE was as follows T0 = 2 (0.5%); T1 = 154 (44.7%); T2 = 142 (41.2%); T3 = 43 (12.5%); Tx = 3 (0.8%); T not reported = 9. Fifty-three percent were > T1. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) was performed in 80 (23.2%) patients. Postoperative major morbidity and mortality occurred in 22 (11.4%) and 3 (1.1%), patients, respectively. An incomplete mesorectal fascia resulting in defects of the mesorectum was reported in 30 (24.6%) cases. Thirteen (12%) patients developed recurrence: 8 (3.1%) local, 19 (7.3%) distant, 4 (1.5%) local and distant. The 5-year cancer-specific survival was 92%. Only 1 study assessed anal function reporting no continence disorders in 11 patients. In the meta-analysis, CRR after TAE showed an increased APR rate (OR 5.25; 95% CI 1.27-21.8; p 0.020) and incomplete mesorectum rate (OR 3.48; 95% CI 1.32-9.19; p 0.010) compared to primary total mesorectal excision (TME). Two case matched studies reported no difference in recurrence rate and disease free survival respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The data are incomplete and of low quality. There was a tendency towards an increased risk of APR and poor specimen quality. It is necessary to improve the accuracy of preoperative staging of malignant rectal tumors in patients scheduled for TAE.

Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Local excision (LE) has arisen as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for the treatment of early rectal cancer. Despite a decreased morbidity, there are still concerns about LE outcomes. This systematic-review and meta-analysis design is based on the "PICO" process, aiming to answer to three questions related to LE as primary treatment for early-rectal cancer, the optimal method for LE, and the potential role for completion treatment in high-risk histology tumors and outcomes of salvage surgery. The results revealed that reported overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 71%-91.7% and 80%-94% for LE, in contrast to 92.3%-94.3% and 94.4%-97% for radical surgery. Additional analysis of National Database studies revealed lower OS with LE (HR: 1.26; 95%CI, 1.09-1.45) and DSS (HR: 1.19; 95%CI, 1.01-1.41) after LE. Furthermore, patients receiving LE were significantly more prone develop local recurrence (RR: 3.44, 95%CI, 2.50-4.74). Analysis of available transanal surgical platforms was performed, finding no significant differences among them but reduced local recurrence compared to traditional transanal LE (OR:0.24;95%CI, 0.15-0.4). Finally, we found poor survival outcomes for patients undergoing salvage surgery, favoring completion treatment (chemoradiotherapy or surgery) when high-risk histology is present. In conclusion, LE could be considered adequate provided a full-thickness specimen can be achieved that the patient is informed about risk for potential requirement of completion treatment. Early-rectal cancer cases should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team, and patient's preferences must be considered in the decision-making process.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment

BACKGROUND

The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions.

RESULTS

Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

Is Previous Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for Early Rectal Cancer a Risk Factor of Worse Outcome following Salvage Surgery A Case-Matched Analysis

Introduction

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a minimally invasive procedure which allows local excision of early-stage rectal cancer and can be used as an alternative treatment to radical surgery. Patients can undergo salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) following TEM after finding of unfavourable histological features. This study aimed to compare results and possible complications of sTME following TEM and primary TME (pTME) procedures.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2017, early sTME was performed in 9 patients at the National Cancer Institute in Vilnius, Lithuania. These patients were compared with 18 patients who underwent pTME, matched according to gender, age, cancer stage, and operative procedure. Data were obtained from the patients' charts and reviewed prospectively. We recorded the demographics, tumour specifications, treatment, operation time, postoperative results complications, and oncological outcome. Fisher's exact test and student's T test was used to compare both groups.

Results

A total of 130 patients underwent TEM at our institution during the study period, of which 9 (6.92%) had to undergo sTME. The average age of the patients was 62.7 ± 7.07 years; 44.4% of the patients were male and 55.6% female. The average tumour size in the sTME group was 2.8 ± 1.05 cm (range 1.5-5) and 2.61 ± 1.36 cm (range 1-5) in the pTME group (p = 0.696). When comparing postoperative complications, statistically significant results were not found in either of the groups (p = 0.55). Operation time of pTME was significantly shorter on average, i.e. 43 min, compared to sTME (p < 0.0267). The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 12.44 ± 7.126 in the sTME and 12.5 ± 8.06 in the pTME group (p = 0.986). The circumferential resection margin (CRM) was negative in 92.6% (25/27) of specimens, while the CRM was positive in 2 cases (7.4%), both of which were from the sTME group. The average follow-up time was 22.8 months (8-80 months) for patients undergoing sTME and 19.33 months (2-88 months) for patients after pTME (p = 0.71).

Conclusions

TEM is a relatively safe method for treating patients with early rectal cancer without high-risk features. It can be used in exceptional cases with high-risk features when the patient is not fit for radical surgery.

A systematic review of local excision followed by adjuvant therapy in early rectal cancer: are pT1 tumours the limit?

AIM

Total mesorectal excision remains the cornerstone of treatment for rectal cancer. Significant morbidity means local excision may be more appropriate in selected patients. Adjuvant therapy reduces local recurrence and improves survival; however, there is a paucity of data on its impact following local excision, which this systematic review aims to address.

METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases using validated terms for rectal cancer, adjuvant therapy and local excision was performed. Included studies focused on local excision with adjuvant therapy for adenocarcinoma of the rectum. Primary outcome measures were local recurrence, survival and morbidity. Studies providing neoadjuvant therapy or local excision alone were excluded.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies described 804 patients. Indications for local excision included favourable histology, patient choice and comorbidities. T1, T2 and T3 tumours accounted for 35.1%, 58.0% and 6.9% of cases, respectively. The most frequent local excision technique was transanal excision (77.7%). Adjuvant therapy included long-course chemoradiation or radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 51 months (range 1-165). The pooled local recurrence was 5.8% (95% CI 3.0-9.5) for pT1, 13.8% (95% CI 10.1-17.9) for pT2 and 33.7% (95% CI 19.2-50.1) for pT3 tumours. The overall median disease-free survival was 88% (range 50%-100%) with a pooled overall morbidity of 15.1% (95% CI 11.0-18.7).

CONCLUSIONS

This area remains highly relevant to modern clinical practice. The data suggest that local excision followed by adjuvant therapy can achieve acceptable long-term outcomes in high-risk pT1 tumours, but not in T2 tumours and above in whom radical surgery should be offered.

Outcomes of Local Excision plus Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with T1 Rectal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend local excision and observation as standard treatment for selected patients with clinical T1N0M0 rectal cancer. In patients with pathological T1 (pT1) rectal cancer who received local excision, the local recurrence rate is at least 10%. We studied oncological outcomes in patients with pT1 rectal cancer who received chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after local excision.

METHODS

Local excision was performed in 65 patients with clinical T1N0M0 rectal cancer (≤8 cm from the anal verge, tumor size < 30 mm, well or moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma). The patients received CRT (40 or 45 Gy in 1.8-2.0 fractions with concurrent oral UFT [tegafur/uracil] or S-1 [tegafur/gimeracil/ote-racil]) after confirmation of pT1 and negative margins.

RESULTS

Patients who had pT2 cancer or who did not provide informed consent were excluded. The remaining 50 patients additionally received CRT. The CRT was completed in 48 patients (96%). The median follow-up period was 71 months. Local recurrence occurred in 1 patient (2%). Distant metastases occurred in 3 patients (6%). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 86%, and the 5-year overall survival rate was 92%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that multidisciplinary treatment with local excision plus CRT can be used as a treatment option in selected patients with clinical T1N0M0 rectal cancer.

Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy After Local Resection for High-Risk T1 to T2 Low Rectal Cancer: Results of a Single-Arm, Multi-Institutional, Phase II Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

After treatment with local excision for TNM stage I low rectal cancer, the risk of local recurrence is not only high for T2 lesions but also for T1 lesions with features of massive invasion to the submucosal layer and/or lymphovascular invasion.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy combined with local excision in the treatment of T1 to T2 low rectal cancer.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective, single-arm, phase II trial.

SETTINGS

This was a multicenter study.

PATIENTS

From April 2003 to October 2010, 57 patients were treated with local excision after additional external beam irradiation (45 Gy) plus continuous 5-week intravenous injection of 5-fluorouracil (250 mg/m per day) at 10 domestic hospitals. Fifty-three patients had clinical T1N0 lesions, and 4 had T2N0 lesions in the low rectum, located below the peritoneal reflection.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary end point was disease-free survival at 5 years.

RESULTS

The completion rate for full-dose chemoradiotherapy was 86% (49/57). Serious, nontransient treatment-related complications were not reported. With a median follow-up of 7.3 years after local excision, the 5-year disease-free survival rate was 94% for the 53 patients with T1 lesions and 75% for the 4 patients with T2 lesions. There were 2 local recurrences during the entire observation period. Anal function after local excision and chemoradiation were kept at almost the same levels as observed before treatment.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by the small number of registered T2 rectal cancers, retrospective evaluations of quality of life, and the exclusion of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (a high-risk feature of T1 lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of chemoradiotherapy to local excision of T1 rectal adenocarcinomas with poor prognostic features including deep submucosal invasion and lymphovascular invasion could improve on less favorable historic oncologic outcomes of local excision alone in this high-risk group for lymph node metastasis. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A421.

A multi-centred randomised trial of radical surgery versus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after local excision for early rectal cancer

Background

Rectal cancer surgery is accompanied with high morbidity and poor long term functional outcome. Screening programs have shown a shift towards more early staged cancers. Patients with early rectal cancer can potentially benefit significantly from rectal preserving therapy. For the earliest stage cancers, local excision is sufficient when the risk of lymph node disease and subsequent recurrence is below 5 %. However, the majority of early cancers are associated with an intermediate risk of lymph node involvement (5–20 %) suggesting that local excision alone is not sufficient, while completion radical surgery, which is currently standard of care, could be a substantial overtreatment for this group of patients.

Methods/Study design

In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with an intermediate risk T1-2 rectal cancer, that has been locally excised using an endoluminal technique, will be randomized between adjuvant chemo-radiotherapylimited to the mesorectum and standard completion total mesorectal excision (TME). To strictly monitor the risk of locoregional recurrence in the experimental arm and enable early salvage surgery, there will be additional follow up with frequent MRI and endoscopy. The primary outcome of the study is three-year local recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes are morbidity, disease free and overall survival, stoma rate, functional outcomes, health related quality of life and costs. The design is a non inferiority study with a total sample size of 302 patients.

Discussion

The results of the TESAR trial will potentially demonstrate that adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is an oncological safe treatment option in patients who are confronted with the difficult clinical dilemma of a radically removed intermediate risk early rectal cancer by polypectomy or transanal surgery that is conventionally treated with subsequent radical surgery. Preserving the rectum using adjuvant radiotherapy is expected to significantly improve morbidity, function and quality of life if compared to completion TME surgery.

Trial registration

NCT02371304, registration date: February 2015

Meta-analysis of oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer requiring adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy or completion surgery

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision (TME) is advised for high-risk early (pT1/pT2) rectal cancer following transanal removal. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes of adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy as a rectum-preserving alternative to completion TME.

METHODS

A literature search using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed in February 2015. Studies had to include at least ten patients with pT1/pT2 adenocarcinomas that were removed transanally and followed by either adjuvant chemoradiotherapy or completion surgery. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined for the pooled analyses of subgroups according to treatment modality and pT category.

RESULTS

In total, 14 studies comprising 405 patients treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy and seven studies comprising 130 patients treated with completion TME were included. Owing to heterogeneity it was not possible to compare the two strategies directly. However, the weighted average local recurrence rate for locally excised pT1/pT2 rectal cancer treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy was 14 (95 per cent c.i. 11 to 18) per cent, and 7 (4 to 14) per cent following completion TME. The weighted averages for distance recurrence were 9 (6 to 14) and 9 (5 to 16) per cent respectively. Weighted averages for local recurrence rate after adjuvant chemo(radiotherapy) and completion TME for pT1 were 10 (4 to 21) and 6 (3 to 15) per cent respectively. Corresponding averages for pT2 were 15 (11 to 21) and 10 (4 to 22) per cent respectively.

CONCLUSION

A higher recurrence rate after transanal excision and adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy must be balanced against the morbidity and mortality associated with mesorectal excision. A reasonable approach is close follow-up and salvage mesorectal surgery as needed.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

Oncologic outcomes and proper surveillance after local excision of rectal cancer

Purpose

The aim of this study was to analyze oncologic outcomes after transanal local excision (LE) to ensure adequate surveillance of recurrence in order to treat with curative intent.

Methods

Between January 2000 and June 2009, 102 patients who underwent transanal LE for rectal adenocarcinoma were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Of the 102 patients, 53 (52.0%) were male. The mean age was 57 ± 11 years. Postoperative pathologic examination revealed 93 cases (91.2%) of pathologic T stage (pT)1 and 9 cases (8.8%) of pT2. Forty-eight patients (47.1%) underwent adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy. The median follow-up interval was 60 months (range, 3 to 146 months). Seven (6.9%) out of 15 patients who suffered recurrence had locoregional recurrence, three (2.9%) had systemic recurrence and five (4.9%) had both systemic and locoregional recurrence. The latter five patients and two of the three patients with systemic recurrence died because of the disease recurrence. On the other hand, only one of the seven patients with locoregional recurrence died because of disease recurrence.

Conclusion

Systemic recurrence after transanal LE results in fatal consequences. Therefore, not only is it important to identify ideal candidates for LE, but intensive postoperative surveillance is important as well to identify curable recurrence as soon as possible.

Update and debate issues in surgical treatment of middle and low rectal cancer

Based on a review of the literature, this paper provides an update on surgical treatment of middle and low rectal cancer and discusses issues of debate surrounding that treatment. The main goal of the surgical treatment of rectal cancer is radical resection of the tumor and surrounding lymphatic tissue. Local excision of early rectal cancer can be another treatment option, in which the patient can avoid possible complications related to radical surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has been recommended for patients with cT3-4N0 or any T N+ rectal cancer because CRT shows better local control and less toxicity than adjuvant CRT. However, recent clinical trials showed promising results for local excision after neoadjuvant CRT in selected patients with low rectal cancer. In addition, the "wait and see" concept is another modality that has been reported for the management of tumors that show complete clinical remission after neoadjuvant CRT. Although radical surgery for middle and low rectal cancer is the cornerstone therapy, an ultralow anterior resection with or without intersphincteric resection (ISR) has become an alternative standard surgical method for selected patients. Many studies have reported on the oncological safety of the ISR, but few of them have addressed the issue the functional outcome. Furthermore, an abdominoperineal resection (APR) has problems with high rates of tumor perforations and positive circumferential resection margins, and those factors have contributed to its having a high rate of local recurrence and a poor survival rate for rectal cancer compared with sphincter-saving procedures. Recently, great efforts have been made to reduce these problems, and the total levator excision or the extended APR concept has emerged. Surgical management for low rectal cancer should aim to radically excise the tumor and to preserve as much of the sphincter function as possible by using multidisciplinary approaches. However, further prospective clinical trials are needed for tailored treatment of rectal cancer patients.

The clinicopathological features of colorectal mucinous adenocarcinoma and a therapeutic strategy for the disease

Background

The guidelines established by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network do not describe mucinous histology as a clinical factor that should influence the therapeutic algorithm. However, previous studies show conflicting results regarding the prognosis of colorectal mucinous adenocarcinoma. In this study, we described the clinicopathological features of mucinous adenocarcinoma in Japan, to identify optimal therapeutic strategies.

Methods

144 patients with mucinous and 2673 with non-mucinous adenocarcinomas who underwent primary resection in two major centers in Yokohama, Japan were retrospectively evaluated for clinicopathological features and treatment factors. A multivariate analysis for overall survival followed by the comparison of overall survival using Cox proportional hazard model were performed.

Results

Patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma had larger primary lesions, higher preoperative CEA levels, a deeper depth of invasion, higher rates of nodal and distant metastasis, and more metastatic sites. A multivariate analysis for overall survival revealed a mucinous histology to be an independent prognostic factor. In the subgroup analysis stratified by stage, Patients diagnosed as StageIII and IV disease had a worse survival in mucinous adenocarcinoma than non-mucinous, while survival did not differ significantly in patients diagnosed as Stage0-II disease. In StageIII, local recurrence in rectal cases and peritoneal dissemination were more frequently observed in patients with a mucinous histology.

Conclusions

Our study indentified that mucinous adenocarcinoma was associated with a worse survival compared with non-mucinous in patients with StageIII and IV disease. In rectal StageIII disease with mucinous histology, additional therapy to control local recurrence followed by surgical resection may be a strategical alternative. Further molecular investigations considering genetic features of mucinous histology will lead to drug development and better management of peritoneal metastasis

ACR Appropriateness Criteria: local excision in early-stage rectal cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection is considered standard treatment for early rectal cancer. These procedures, however, carry a risk of morbidity and mortality that may not be warranted for early distal lesions, which may be treated with local excision. Emerging data has investigated the efficacy of local excision in patients with early stage rectal cancers. An expert panel designated by the American College of Radiology has reviewed supporting data, from a few prospective multi-institutional trials and a number of single-institution, retrospective reviews. The consensus recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a local excision approach. Optimal candidates for local excision alone include small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. A number of procedures may be safely used including transanal, posterior trans-sphincteric, posterior proctotomy, transanal excision, or transanal microsurgery. It is important to note that none of these include lymph node evaluation, and depending on the risk of lymph node metastases, adjuvant radiation with or without chemotherapy may be warranted. Patients with positive margins or T3 lesions are at high risk of local recurrence and should be offered immediate APR or LAR. However, patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors, or those who are not amenable to more radical surgery may benefit from adjuvant treatment. Data have also reported excellent local control rates for neoadjuvant radiation +/- chemotherapy followed by local excision in higher risk patients, but it is not yet clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

A comparison of transanal excision and endoscopic resection for early rectal cancer

AIM: To compare the outcomes of endoscopic resection with transanal excision in patients with early rectal cancer.

METHODS: Thirty-two patients with early rectal cancer were treated by transanal excision or endoscopic resection between May 1999 and December 2007. The patients were regularly re-examined by means of colonoscopy and abdominal computed tomography after resection of the early rectal cancer. Complications, length of hospital-stay, disease recurrence and follow up outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS: Sixteen patients were treated by endoscopic resection and 16 patients were treated by transanal excision. No significant differences were present in the baseline characteristics. The rate of complete resection in the endoscopic resection group was 93.8%, compared to 87.5% in the transanal excision group (P = 0.544). The mean length of hospital-stay in the endoscopic resection group was 2.7 ± 1.1 d, compared to 8.9 ± 2.7 d in the transanal excision group (P = 0.001). The median follow up was 15.0 mo (range 6-99). During the follow up period, there was no case of recurrent disease in either group.

CONCLUSION: Endoscopic resection was a safe and effective method for the treatment of early rectal cancers and its outcomes were comparable to those of transanal excision procedures.

Preoperative staging and treatment options in T1 rectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Major rectal resection for T1 rectal cancer offers more than 95% cancer specific five-year survival to patients surviving the first 30 days after surgery. A significant further improvement by development of the surgical technique may not be possible. Improvements in the total survival rate have to come from a more differentiated treatment modality, taking patient and procedure related risk factors into account. Subgroups of patients have operative mortality risks of 10% or more. Operative complications and long-term side effects after rectum resection are frequent and often severe.

RESULTS

Local treatment of T1 cancers combined with close follow-up, early salvage surgery or later radical resection of local recurrences or with chemo-radiation may lead to fewer severe complications and comparable, or even better, long-term survival. Accurate preoperative staging and careful selection of patients for local or non-operative treatment are mandatory. As preoperative staging, at present, is not sufficiently accurate, strategies for completion, salvage or rescue surgery is important, and must be accepted by the patient before local treatment for cure is initiated.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that polyps with low-risk T1 cancers should be treated with endoscopic snare resection in case of Haggitt's stage 1 or 2. TEM is recommended if resection margins are uncertain after snare resection for Haggitt's stage 3 and 4, and for sessile and flat, low-risk T1 cancers. Average risk patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be offered rectum resection, but old and comorbid patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be treated individually according to objective criteria as age, physical performance as well as patient's preference. All patients treated for cure with local resection or non-surgical methods should be followed closely.