Preoperative radiotherapy improves outcome in recurrent rectal cancer

Locally recurrent rectal cancer and distant metastases: is there still a chance ofcure?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) generally have poor prognosis, especially those who have (a history of) distant metastases. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of distant metastases on oncological outcomes in LRRC patients undergoing curative treatment.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with surgically treated LRRC between 2005 and 2019 in two tertiary referral hospitals were retrospectively analysed. Oncological survival of patients without distant metastases were compared with outcomes of patients with synchronous distant metastases with the primary tumour, patients with distant metastases in the primary-recurrence interval, and patients with synchronous LRRC distant metastases.

RESULTS

A total of 535 LRRC patients were analysed, of whom 398 (74%) had no (history of) metastases, 22 (4%) had synchronous metastases with the primary tumour, 44 (8%) had metachronous metastases, and 71 (13%) had synchronous LRRC metastases. Patients with synchronous LRRC metastases had worse survival compared to patients without metastases (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.56 [1.15-2.12]), whilst survival of patients with synchronous primary metastases and metachronous metastases of the primary tumour was similar as those patients who had no metastases. In LRRC patients who had metastases in primary-recurrence interval, patients with early metachronous metastases had better disease-free survival as patients with late metachronous metastases (3-year disease-free survival: 48% vs 22%, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

LRRC patients with synchronous distant metastases undergoing curative surgery have relatively poor prognosis. However, LRRC patients with a history of distant metastases diagnosed nearby the primary tumour have comparable (oncological) survival as LRRC patients without distant metastases.

Omentoplasty in Patients Undergoing Abdominoperineal Resection After Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced and Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Comparative Single-Institution Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Omentoplasty is a commonly performed procedure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, but its effectiveness to reduce pelviperineal complications is not firmly established.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the impact of omentoplasty on postoperative outcomes after long-course (chemo) radiotherapy and abdominoperineal resection in patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Single center.

PATIENTS

All patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation in a tertiary referral center between 2008 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to analyze the association between omentoplasty and pelviperineal complications, duration of nasogastric tube drainage, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 305 patients were analyzed, of whom 245 underwent omentoplasty (80%). Pelviperineal complications occurred in 151 patients (50%) overall, in 125 patients (51%) with omentoplasty, and in 26 patients (43%) without omentoplasty. Independent predictors of pelviperineal complications in multivariable analyses were smoking (OR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.46-4.94) and high BMI (OR 1.68; 95% CI, 1.00-2.83), but not omentoplasty (OR 1.36; 95% CI, 0.77-2.40). The mean duration of nasogastric tube drainage was longer after omentoplasty (6 vs 4 d) with a significant association in multivariable analysis (β coefficient 1.97; 95% CI, 0.35-3.59). Patients undergoing omentoplasty had a significantly longer hospital stay (14 vs 10 d), and omentoplasty remained associated with a prolonged hospital stay after adjusting for confounding (β coefficient 3.05; 95% CI, 0.05-5.74).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Omentoplasty was not associated with a reduced risk of the occurrence of short-term pelviperineal complications after abdominoperineal resection in patients undergoing long-course (chemo)radiotherapy. Furthermore, in patients undergoing omentoplasty, prolonged duration of nasogastric tube drainage and hospital stay was observed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C124 .

OMENTOPLASTIA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A RESECCIN ABDOMINOPERINEAL DESPUS DE QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA DE CURSO LARGO PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y LOCALMENTE RECURRENTE ESTUDIO DE COHORTE COMPARATIVO DE UNA SOLA INSTITUCIN

ANTECEDENTES:La omentoplastía es un procedimiento que se realiza comúnmente después de la resección abdominoperineal por cáncer de recto, pero su efectividad para reducir las complicaciones pelvicoperineales no está firmemente establecida.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el impacto de la omentoplastía en las complicaciones pelvicoperineales a corto plazo y los resultados postoperatorios después quimioradioterapia de curso largo y resección abdominoperineal en pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y localmente recurrente.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Centro único.PACIENTES:Se revisaron retrospectivamente todos los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y localmente recurrente sometidos a resección abdominoperineal después de quimioradiación neoadyuvante en un centro de referencia de tercer nivel entre 2008 y 2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se realizaron análisis de regresión lineal y logística multivariable para examinar la asociación entre la omentoplastía y las complicaciones pelvicoperineales (p. ej., problemas de heridas perineales y abscesos pélvicos), la duración del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica y la duración de la estancia hospitalaria.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron un total de 305 pacientes de los cuales 245 fueron sometidos a omentoplastía (80%). Las complicaciones pelvicoperineales ocurrieron en 151 pacientes (50%) en general, y en 125 (51%) y 26 (43%) de los pacientes con o sin omentoplastía, respectivamente. Los predictores independientes de complicaciones pelvicoperineales en análisis multivariable fueron el tabaquismo (OR 2.68, IC del 95% 1.46 a 4.94) y un IMC alto (OR 1.68, IC del 95% 1.00 a 2.83), pero no la omentoplastía (OR 1.36, IC del 95% 0.77 a 2.40) . La duración media del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica fue mayor después de la omentoplastía (6 frente a 4 días) con una asociación significativa en el análisis multivariable (coeficiente β 1.97, IC del 95%: 0.35-3.59). Los pacientes que se sometieron a una omentoplastía tuvieron una estancia hospitalaria significativamente más larga (14 frente a 10 días), y la omentoplastía permaneció asociada con una estancia hospitalaria prolongada después de ajustar por factores de confusión (coeficiente β 3.05, IC del 95%: 0.05-5.74).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La omentoplastía no se asoció con un riesgo reducido de aparición de complicaciones pelvicoperineales a corto plazo después de la resección abdominoperineal en pacientes sometidos a quimioradioterapia de larga duración. Adicionalmente, en los pacientes sometidos a omentoplastía se observó una duración prolongada del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica y la estancia hospitalaria. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C124 . (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

Oncological outcomes of multimodality treatment for patients undergoing surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There are several strategies in the management of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) with the optimum treatment yet to be established. This systematic review aims to compare oncological outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for LRRC who underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (CRT), adjuvant CRT, surgery only or surgery and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT).

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL was performed for studies that reported data on oncological outcomes for the different treatment modalities in patients with LRRC from January 1990 to January 2022. Weighted means were calculated for the following outcomes: postoperative resection status, local control, and overall survival at 3 and 5 years.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies of 974 patients were included and they received the following treatment: 346 neoadjuvant radiotherapy, 279 neoadjuvant CRT, 136 adjuvant CRT, 189 surgery only, and 24 surgery and IORT. The highest proportion of R0 resection was found in the neoadjuvant CRT group followed by neoadjuvant radiotherapy and adjuvant CRT groups (64.07% vs 52.46% vs 47.0% respectively). The neoadjuvant CRT group had the highest mean 5-year local control rate (49.50%) followed by neoadjuvant radiotherapy (22.0%). Regarding the 5-year overall survival rate, the neoadjuvant CRT group had the highest mean of 34.92%, followed by surgery only (29.74%), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (28.94%) and adjuvant CRT (20.67%).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this systematic review suggest that neoadjuvant CRT followed by surgery can lead to improved resection status, long-term disease control and survival in the management of LRRC. However, treatment strategies in LRRC are complex and further comparisons, particularly taking into account previous treatments for the primary rectal cancer, are required.

Long-Term Prognosis after Surgery for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Objective:

Resection is usually recommended for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) for which R0 resection is possible, but its suitability varies by individual patient risk. Here, we report outcomes of resected LRRC in our hospital.

Methods:

We retrospectively evaluated short- and long-term results of 33 patients who underwent resections for LRRC from January 2003 to December 2019.

Results:

At the initial surgeries for these 33 patients, their disease stages at that time were Stage I: n=2, Stage II: n=12, Stage III: n=11, Stage IV: n=6, and unknown: n=2. Patients with Stage IV disease at their initial surgeries underwent radical one-step or two-step procedures. Metastasis to other organs was observed in 5 patients at the their initial LRRC diagnoses. At the LRRC surgeries, 7 patients received palliative surgeries; 26 received intent-to-treat resections, of which 17 were R0 resections. All-grade postoperative complications were observed in 11 patients, including 1 surgery-related death. Five-year overall survival rates were all cases: 38.4%; R0 group: 52.3%, R1 or R2 group: 19.4%, and palliative surgery group: 0%. The R0 group thus had significantly better prognosis than other patients (P = 0.0012). Eleven patients in the R0 group (64.7%) suffered re-recurrences but some patients achieved long-term survival through chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery for metastasis to other organs, even after re-recurrence.

Conclusion:

Long-term prognosis after surgery for LRRC was significantly better for patients with R0 margins. Multimodal treatments may greatly improve survival for patients who suffer re-recurrences after local recurrence resections.

Clinical selection strategy for and evaluation of intra-operative brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A radical resection of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) or recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) can be challenging. In case of increased risk of an R1 resection, intra-operative brachytherapy (IOBT) can be applied. We evaluated the clinical selection strategy for IOBT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February 2007 and May 2018, 132 LARC/RRC patients who were scheduled for surgery with IOBT standby, were evaluated. By intra-operative inspection of the resection margin and MR imaging, it was determined whether a resection was presumed to be radical. Frozen sections were taken on indication. In case of a suspected R1 resection, IOBT (1 × 10 Gy) was applied. Histopathologic evaluation, treatment and toxicity data were collected from medical records.

RESULTS

Tumour was resected in 122 patients. IOBT was given in 42 patients of whom 54.8% (n = 23) had a histopathologically proven R1 resection. Of the 76 IOBT-omitted R0 resected patients, 17.1% (n = 13) had a histopathologically proven R1 resection. In 4 IOBT-omitted patients, a clinical R1/2 resection was seen. In total, correct clinical judgement occurred in 72.6% (n = 88) of patients. In LARC, 58.3% (n = 14) of patients were overtreated (R0, with IOBT) and 10.9% (n = 5) were undertreated (R1, without IOBT). In RRC, 26.5% (n = 9) of patients were undertreated.

CONCLUSION

In total, correct clinical judgement occurred in 72.6% (n = 88). However, in 26.5% (n = 9) RRC patients, IOBT was unjustifiedly omitted. IOBT is accompanied by comparable and acceptable toxicity. Therefore, we recommend IOBT to all RRC patients at risk of an R1 resection as their salvage treatment.

The clinical relevance of indeterminate lung nodules in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

To evaluate the clinical relevance of indeterminate lung nodules (ILN) in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) treated in a tertiary referral centre.

METHODS

All patients with LRRC diagnosed between 2000 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Reports of staging chest CT-scans were evaluated for ILN. Patients with distant metastases including lung metastases at time of LRRC diagnosis were excluded. Overall (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and the cumulative incidence of lung metastases were compared between patients with and without ILN.

RESULTS

In total 556 patients with LRRC were treated during the study period. In the 243 patients eligible for analysis, 68 (28%) had ILN at LRRC diagnosis. Median OS was 37 months for both the patients with and without ILN (p = 0.37). Median PFS was 14 months for the patients with ILN and 16 months for patients without ILN (p = 0.80). After correction for potential confounding, ILN present at LRRC diagnosis was not associated with impaired OS or PFS (adjusted hazards ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.81 [0.54-1.22] and 1.09 [0.75-1.59]). The 5-year cumulative incidence of lung metastases was 31% in patients with ILN and 28% in patients without ILN (p = 0.19).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that ILN are present in roughly a quarter of patients with LRRC. No differences in OS, PFS, or the cumulative incidence of lung metastases were found between patients with and without ILN at LRRC diagnosis. These results suggest that ILN are of little to no clinical relevance in patients with LRRC.

A phase III randomized controlled trial comparing surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy with preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group study JCOG1801 (RC-SURVIVE study)

A randomized phase III trial was initiated in Japan in August 2019 to confirm the superiority of preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy compared to the standard treatment, i.e. surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy, for locally recurrent rectal cancer in local relapse-free survival. In all, 110 patients from 43 Japanese institutions will be recruited over a period of 6 years. Eligible patients would be registered and randomly assigned to each group with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is local relapse-free survival. The secondary endpoints are overall survival, relapse-free survival, proportion of local relapse, proportion of distant relapse, proportion of patients with pathological R0 resection, response rate of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (preoperative chemoradiotherapy arm), pathological complete response rate (preoperative chemoradiotherapy arm), proportion of patients who completed the protocol treatment, incidence of adverse events (adverse reactions) and quality of life after surgery. This trial has been registered at the Japan Registry of Clinical Trial: jRCTs031190076 [https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs031190076] and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04288999 [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04288999].

Improved Outcomes for Responders After Treatment with Induction Chemotherapy and Chemo(re)irradiation for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in the multimodality treatment for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), oncological outcomes remain poor. This study evaluated the effect of induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation on the pathologic response and the rate of resections with clear margins (R0 resection) in relation to long-term oncological outcomes.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with LRRC treated in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven who underwent a resection after treatment with induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation between January 2010 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Induction chemotherapy consisted of CAPOX/FOLFOX. Endpoints were pathologic response, resection margin and overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), local recurrence free survival (LRFS), and metastasis free survival (MFS).

RESULTS

A pathologic complete response was observed in 22 patients (17%), a "good" response (Mandard 2-3) in 74 patients (56%), and a "poor" response (Mandard 4-5) in 36 patients (27%). An R0 resection was obtained in 83 patients (63%). The degree of pathologic response was linearly correlated with the R0 resection rate (p = 0.026). In patients without synchronous metastases, pathologic response was an independent predictor for LRFS, MFS, and DFS (p = 0.004, p = 0.003, and p = 0.024, respectively), whereas R0 resection was an independent predictor for LRFS and OS (p = 0.020 and p = 0.028, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Induction chemotherapy in addition to neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation is a promising treatment strategy for patients with LRRC with high pathologic response rates that translate into improved oncological outcomes, especially when an R0 resection has been achieved.

Pushing the boundaries of pelvic exenteration by maintaining survival at the cost of morbidity

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) provides a potentially curative option for advanced or recurrent malignancy confined to the pelvis. A clear (R0) resection margin is the strongest prognostic factor predicting long-term survival, driving most technical advances in PE surgery. The aim of this cohort study was to describe changing trends in extent of resection, postoperative complications, mortality and overall survival after PE surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent PE for advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy at a single institution in Sydney, Australia, were identified. The cohort was divided into three groups based on time periods reflecting annual surgical volume: 1994-2006 (20 or fewer procedures per year), 2007-2013 (21-50 procedures per year) and 2014-2017 (over 50 procedures per year). Primary outcomes were extent of resection, postoperative complications, 60-day mortality and 3-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, receipt of neoadjuvant therapy and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

There were increases over time in rates of lateral and posterior compartment resections (P < 0·001), and bony pelvis (P = 0·002) and neurovascular (P < 0·001) excision. For patients undergoing reconstruction, the proportion receiving vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous flaps increased significantly (P = 0·005). Rates of wound infection, dehiscence, and abdominal and pelvic collections increased over the study interval. Short-term mortality decreased, and 1- and 3-year survival rates improved.

CONCLUSION

Technical and surgical advancements have led to more complex PE resections, with R0 and mortality rates improving with higher annual volume. There were associated increases in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity.

Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Laparoscopic versus Open Approach

Aims and background

To evaluate the oncologic safety of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Methods and study design

Patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 256) or open (n = 173) total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between June 2005 and June 2011 were included. Long-term survival operative data and postoperative recovery were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively collected database.

Results

No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of age, sex, tumor stage and preoperative comorbidities. Twelve patients were converted to open procedures. Differences were found in blood loss (55 ± 14.1 vs 152 ± 29.2 ml P <0.05), infection of incision (3.1% vs 12.7%, P <0.05) and postoperative stay (8.1 ± 3.0 vs 12.4 ± 6.3 days, P <0.05). Both groups were comparable regarding lymph node clearance specimen length and distal margin. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the two groups by the life-table method. However, operative time in the laparoscopic group was longer than in the open group (168 ± 27.6 vs 141 ± 21.9 min, P <0.05).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer offers oncologic results similar to those obtained with the open procedure with a favorable short-term outcome. Continued use of the procedure in these patients is supported.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation in Neoadjuvant Therapy of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background

The aim of the study was to present an update concerning several imaging modalities in diagnosis, staging and pre-surgery treatment response assessment in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Modalities include: traditional morphological magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional MRI such as dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). A systematic review about the diagnostic accuracy in neoadjuvant therapy response assessment of MRI, DCE-MRI, DWI and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) has been also reported.

Methods

Several electronic databases were searched including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. All the studies included in this review reported findings about therapy response assessment in LARC by means of MRI, DCE-MRI, DWI and PET/CT with details about diagnostic accuracy, true and false negatives, true and false positives. Forest plot and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysis were performed. Risk of bias and the applicability at study level were calculated.

Results

Twenty-five papers were identified. ROC curves analysis demonstrated that multimodal imaging integrating morphological and functional MRI features had the best accuracy both in term of sensitivity and specificity to evaluate preoperative therapy response in LARC. DCE-MRI following to PET/CT showed high diagnostic accuracy and their results are also more reliable than conventional MRI and DWI alone.

Conclusions

Morphological MRI is the modality of choice for rectal cancer staging permitting a correct assessment of the disease extent, of the lymph node involvement, of the mesorectal fascia and of the sphincter complex for surgical planning. Multimodal imaging and functional DCE-MRI may also help in the assessment of treatment response allowing to guide the surgeon versus conservative strategies and/or tailored approach such as “wait and see” policy.

Do patients requiring a multivisceral resection for rectal cancer have worse oncologic outcomes than patients undergoing only abdominoperineal resection?

INTRODUCTION

Abdominoperineal Resection (APR) remains an important option for patients with advanced rectal cancer though some may require multivisceral resection (MVR) in addition to APR. We hypothesized that oncological outcomes would be worse with MVR.

METHODS

A retrospective review from 2006 to 2015 of 161 patients undergoing APR or MVR for rectal cancer, of whom 118 underwent curative APR or APR with MVR. Perioperative, oncologic and survival metrics were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 82 patients who underwent APR and 36 who underwent MVR. Surgical approach and incidence of complications were similar (All P > 0.05). There was 1 local recurrence in each of the APR and MVR groups at a mean follow-up of 34 and 32 months, respectively. Distant recurrences occurred in 3 APR patients and 4 MVR patients.

CONCLUSIONS

APR and APR with MVR can be performed with comparable morbidity and oncologic outcomes.

The Impact of Novel Radiation Treatment Techniques on Toxicity and Clinical Outcomes In Rectal Cancer

Purpose of review

Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) has been the standard technique in the treatment of rectal cancer. The use of new radiation treatment technologies such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), proton therapy (PT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) has been increasing over the past 10 years. This review will highlight the advantages and drawbacks of these techniques.

Recent findings

IMRT, PT, SBRT and BT achieve a higher target coverage conformity, a higher organ at risk sparing and enable dose escalation compared to 3DCRT. Some studies suggested a reduction in gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities and an increase in the complete pathologic response rate; however, the clinical benefit of these techniques remains controversial.

Summary

The results of these new techniques seem encouraging despite conclusive data. Further trials are required to establish their role in rectal cancer.

Extended lymphadenectomy for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess the value of extended (lateral) lymphadenectomy (EL) in the operative management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients that underwent exenterative surgery for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer between 2006 and 2009 were included in the study. A decision for EL was taken at the local multidisciplinary meeting based on the radiological findings. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were assessed and compared between the EL and non-EL group prospectively.

RESULTS

Forty-one consecutive patients were included in the study (EL = 17). The median age was 57 (40-71) for EL and 66 (39-81) years for non-EL. Of patients, 27 (EL = 13) and 14 (EL = 4) underwent pelvic exenteration and abdominosacral resection, respectively. Twelve (EL = 7) patients were diagnosed with locally advanced primary rectal cancer. Thirty-one (EL = 12) patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. The median intraoperative time, blood loss and hospital stay were 9 h (3-13), 1.5 l (0.3-7) and 14 days (12-72), respectively, for the EL group, and 8 h (4-15), 1.6 l (0.25-17) and 14 days (10-86), respectively, for the non-EL (p ≥ 0.394). Morbidity was similar between the two groups (EL = 4, non-EL = 9; p = 0.344). Complete tumour resection (R0) was achieved in 30 (73.17%) patients, 12 (70.58%) in the EL group and 18 (75%) in the non-EL group (p = 0.649). There was no significant difference in 5-year survival (EL = 60.7%, non-EL = 75.2%; p = 0.447), local recurrence (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 65.4%; p = 0.489) and disease-free survival (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 51.4%; p = 0.814).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that EL does not provide a statistically significant advantage in survival or recurrence rates, for patients with locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal cancer.

Intraoperative radiotherapy with low energy photons in recurrent colorectal cancer: a single centre retrospective study

AIM OF THE STUDY

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) may improve outcome of surgical treatment of recurrent colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility, safety and long-term results of surgical treatment of recurrent CRC with orthovolt IORT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-nine consecutive CRC patients with local recurrence (LR), undergoing surgery, were included in the retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. The modified Wanebo classification was used to stage LR (Tr). Twenty-five (43%) patients received IORT using INTRABEAM(®) PRS 500. The complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

There were 32 males and 27 females, with a median age of 63 years. Multi-visceral resections were performed in 37 (63%) patients. Median hospitalization time after surgery with IORT was 7 days. One (1.7%) in-hospital postoperative death was reported. Grade 3/4 postoperative complications were found in 11 (19%) patients. Intraoperative radiotherapy had no effect on the postoperative hospitalization time, morbidity and mortality. Median survival after R0 resection was 32 months. Complete resection (R0), no synchronous liver metastases (M0), and no lateral and posterior pelvic wall involvement, were significant predictors of improved survival. Stage of LR was found to be an independent prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.03); Cox regression model). In patients with LR stage < Tr5, a 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 52%.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of surgical resection and orthovolt IORT is a safe and feasible procedure that does not increase the risk of postoperative complications or prolongs the hospital stay. Despite aggressive surgery supported by IORT, the advanced stage of LR is a limiting factor of long-term survival.

Does radiotherapy of the primary rectal cancer affect prognosis after pelvic exenteration for recurrent rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy reduces local recurrence rates but is also capable of short- and long-term toxicity. It may also render treatment of local recurrence more challenging if it develops despite previous radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the impact of radiotherapy for the primary rectal cancer on outcomes after pelvic exenteration for local recurrence.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective review of exenteration databases.

SETTING

The study took place at a quaternary referral center that specializes in pelvic exenteration.

PATIENTS

Patients referred for pelvic exenteration from October 1994 to November 2012 were reviewed. Patients who did and did not receive radiotherapy as part of their primary rectal cancer treatment were compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcomes of interest were resection margins, overall survival, disease-free survival, and surgical morbidities.

RESULTS

There were 108 patients, of which 87 were eligible for analysis. Patients who received radiotherapy for their primary rectal cancer (n = 41) required more radical exenterations (68% vs 44%; p = 0.020), had lower rates of clear resection margins (63% vs 87%; p = 0.010), had increased rates of surgical complications per patient (p = 0.014), and had a lower disease-free survival (p = 0.022). Overall survival and disease-free survival in patients with clear margins were also lower in the primary irradiated patients (p = 0.049 and p < 0.0001). This difference in survival persisted in multivariate analysis that corrected for T and N stages of the primary tumor.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its retrospective nature and heterogeneous radiotherapy regimes among radiotherapy patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who previously received radiotherapy for primary rectal cancer treatment have worse oncologic outcomes than those who had not received radiotherapy after pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

Chemoradiotherapy response in recurrent rectal cancer

The efficacy of response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in recurrent versus primary rectal cancer has not been investigated. We compared radiological downsizing between primary and recurrent rectal cancers following CRT and determined the optimal size reduction threshold for response validated by survival outcomes. The proportional change in tumor length for primary and recurrent rectal cancers following CRT was compared using the independent sample t-test. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier product limit method and differences between survival for tumor size reduction thresholds of 30% (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors [RECIST]), 40%, and 50% after CRT in primary and recurrent rectal cancer groups. A total of 385 patients undergoing CRT were analyzed, 99 with recurrent rectal cancer and 286 with primary rectal cancer. The mean proportional reduction in maximum craniocaudal length was significantly higher for primary rectal tumors (33%) compared with recurrent rectal cancer (11%) (P < 0.01). There was no difference in OS for either primary or recurrent rectal cancer when ≤30% or ≤40% definitions were used. However, for both primary and recurrent tumors, significant differences in median 3-year OS were observed when a RECIST cut-off of 50% was used. OS was 99% versus 77% in primary and 100% versus 42% in recurrent rectal cancer (P = 0.002 and P = 0.03, respectively). Only patients that demonstrated >50% size reduction showed a survival benefit. Recurrent rectal cancer appears radioresistant compared with primary tumors for tumor size after CRT. Further investigation into improving/intensifying chemotherapy and radiotherapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer is justified.

Outcome in patients with resectable locally recurrent rectal cancer after total mesorectal excision with and without previous neoadjuvant radiotherapy for the primary rectal tumor

BACKGROUND

The widespread use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRTx) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) introduced the problem of treating locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after nRTx and TME. Few data exist on the outcome of the surgical treatment of this type of LRRC and the influence of nRTx for the primary tumor on the outcome is unclear.

METHODS

All patients receiving multimodality treatment (including intraoperative radiotherapy) for LRRC in our center between 1996 and 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. The outcome of patients with nonmetastasized resectable LRRC who received nRTx and TME for the primary tumor was compared to the outcome of patients who did not receive nRTx for the primary tumor.

RESULTS

During this period, 139 patients underwent surgery for LRRC; 93 of these patients underwent curative surgery for LRRC after TME for the primary tumor. Sixty-five patients did not receive nRTx for the primary tumor, whereas 28 patients received nRTx for the primary tumor. There were no significant differences in the number of incomplete resections or perioperative morbidities. There was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (28 vs. 43%, p = 0.81), recurrence-free survival (55 vs. 48%, p = 0.5), and disease-free survival (27 vs. 40%, p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical treatment of carefully selected patients with nonmetastasized resectable LRRC after nRTx and TME for the primary tumor is feasible and can result in sustained local control and overall survival. Patients with resectable LRRC who received nRTx for the primary tumor do not have a poorer outcome than patients who did not.

Intentionally curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of outcome data beyond local recurrence rates after primary treatment in rectal cancer, despite more information being necessary for clinical decision-making. We sought to determine patient selection, therapeutic modalities and outcomes of locally recurrent rectal cancer treated with curative intent.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (1990-2010) using the medical subject headings "rectal neoplasms" and "neoplasm recurrence, local." Selection of cohort studies was based on the primary intention of treatment and availability of at least 1 outcome variable.

RESULTS

We included 55 cohort studies comprising 3767 patients; 8 studies provided data on the rate of intentionally curative treatment from an unselected consecutive cohort of patients (481 of 1188 patients; 40%). Patients were symptomatic with pain in 50% (796 of 1607) of cases. Overall, 3088 of 3767 patients underwent resection. The R0 resection rate was 56% (1484 of 2637 patients). The rate of external beam radiotherapy was 100% in 9 studies, 0% in 5 studies, and ranged from 12% to 97% in 37 studies. Overall postoperative mortality was 2.2% (57 of 2515 patients). Five-year survival was at least 25%, with an upper limit of 41% in 11 of 18 studies including at least 50 resections. We found a significant increase in reported survival rates over time (r2 = 0.214, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

More uniformity in treatment protocols and reporting on outcomes for locally recurrent rectal cancer is warranted. The observed improvement of reported survival rates in time is probably related to better patient selection and optimized multimodality treatment in specialized centres.

Intraoperative Electron Radiation Therapy (IOERT) in the management of locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

To evaluate disease control, overall survival and prognostic factors in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer after IOERT-containing multimodal therapy.

METHODS

Between 1991 and 2006, 97 patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer have been treated with surgery and IOERT. IOERT was preceded or followed by external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in 54 previously untreated patients (median dose 41.4 Gy) usually combined with 5-Fluouracil-based chemotherapy (89%). IOERT was delivered via cylindric cones with doses of 10-20 Gy. Adjuvant CHT was given only in a minority of patients (34%). Median follow-up was 51 months.

RESULTS

Margin status was R0 in 37%, R1 in 33% and R2 in 30% of the patients. Neoadjuvant EBRT resulted in significantly increased rates of free margins (52% vs. 24%). Median overall survival was 39 months. Estimated 5-year rates for central control (inside the IOERT area), local control (inside the pelvis), distant control and overall survival were 54%, 41%, 40% and 30%. Resection margin was the strongest prognostic factor for overall survival (3-year OS of 80% (R0), 37% (R1), 35% (R2)) and LC (3-year LC 82% (R0), 41% (R1), 18% (R2)) in the multivariate model. OS was further significantly affected by clinical stage at first diagnosis and achievement of local control after treatment in the univariate model. Distant failures were found in 46 patients, predominantly in the lung. 90-day postoperative mortality was 3.1%.

CONCLUSION

Long term OS and LC can be achieved in a substantial proportion of patients with recurrent rectal cancer using a multimodality IOERT-containing approach, especially in case of clear margins. LC and OS remain limited in patients with incomplete resection. Preoperative re-irradiation and adjuvant chemotherapy may be considered to improve outcome.

Preoperative versus postoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer in a decision analysis and outcome prediction model

PURPOSE

Reduction of local recurrences has been achieved by radiotherapy, but also by improved surgical technique (total mesorectal excision). Radiotherapy has adverse effects and cannot exceed local dose limits. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy may result in overtreatment. We aimed to define the minimum local benefit that would have to be postulated for radiotherapy in order to bring a benefit to the overall cohort. We hypothesized that saving radiotherapy as treatment for a subset of patients with high-risk tumors and local recurrences improves the outcome of the overall cohort. We sought to simulate preoperative versus postoperative radiotherapy in theoretical decision analysis model based on published recurrence rates, with overall survival being the primary end point.

METHODS

Computerized literature search for studies published between 1996 and 2011, supplemented by manual review of the retrieved reference lists.

RESULTS

Postoperative radiotherapy evolved as preferred strategy with cure rates of 65.6 % vs. 63.7 % for postoperative and neoadjuvant radiotherapy, respectively, and a decrease of radiation exposure to 42.9 % of the cohort. The system was sensitive to (1) the fraction of stage I cancers included in the cohort, (2) the difference between local recurrence rates (LRR) for neoadjuvant radiotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy, or surgery-only approach, and (3) the compliance with the postoperative radiotherapy. If the surgery-only recurrence was set to the published 10 %, 13 %, and 27 %, respectively, adjuvant radiotherapy had to achieve LRR below the threshold values of 6.3 %, 8.5 %, and 18.3 % to reverse the impact of compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy only improves cancer-specific survival of the cohort if there is a large difference in LRR with versus without it. Routine treatment may therefore be inferior to a tailored radiotherapy regimen.

Current management of locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

A review of the literature was undertaken to provide an overview of the surgical management of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after the introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME).

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases. Only studies on patients having surgery for their primary tumour after 1995, or if more than half of the patients were operated on after 1995, were considered for analysis. Studies concerning only palliative treatments were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Locally recurrent rectal cancer still occurred in 5-10% of the patients and was a major clinical problem, due to severe symptoms and poor survival. In most studies, 40-50% of all patients with LRRC could be expected to undergo surgery with a curative intent and of those, 30-45% would have R0 resection. Thus, only 20-30% of all patients with LRRC would have a potentially curative operation. The postoperative complication rate varied considerably, from 15 to 68%. The rate of re-recurrence varied from 4 to 54% after curative surgery. The 5-year overall survival varied between 9 and 39% and the median survival between 21 and 55 months.

CONCLUSION

Compared with previous studies, the proportion of potentially curative resections seems to have increased, probably due to improved staging, neoadjuvant treatment and increased surgical experience in dedicated centres, which has resulted in a tendency to improved survival.

[Locally recurrent rectal cancer]

Over the last decades the therapy of rectal carcinoma has shown continuous improvement. Due to improvements in operative techniques, such as the establishment of total mesorectal excision (TME) and the combination of surgery and (neo-) adjuvant radiochemotherapy, the incidence of locally recurrent rectal cancer could be improved from nearly 50% to less then 10%. Nevertheless recurrent rectal carcinoma remains a severe problem. Predictive factors relating to locally recurrent rectal cancer are surgical experience, localization of the tumor, circumferential resection margins, stage-oriented multimodal therapy and a suitable oncological procedure for the primary tumor. In addition the tumor-specific biology also seems to be a relevant risk factor for recurrence. Operative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer was seen for a long time as a palliative procedure. Newer data show that resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer can be carried out with a curative intention in experienced institutions with a long-term 5 year survival of about 30% and mortality around 5%. The composite sacropelvic resection technique is a reasonable option in the curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer. For the future the focus must be on improvements in the primary therapy of rectal carcinoma to avoid local recurrence. In addition early diagnosis of local recurrence and multimodal therapies will be of decisive importance.

Multidisciplinary approach to recurrent/unresectable rectal cancer: how to prepare for the extent of resection

Local recurrence from rectal cancer is a complex problem that should be managed by a multidisciplinary team. Pelvic re-irradiation and intraoperative radiation should be considered in the management of these patients. Long-term survival can be achieved in patients who undergo radical surgery with negative margins of resections. The morbidity of these procedures is high and at times may compromise quality of life. Palliative surgical procedures can be considered; however, in some cases, palliative resections may not be better than nonsurgical palliation.

Clinical algorithms for the surgical management of locally recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Advances in surgical practice have helped expand the options for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer through improvements in reconstructive options, management of operative complications, addition of intraoperative adjuvant therapies, and postoperative care. This review outlines the presentation and management of patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer, and it describes easy-to-apply clinical algorithms to aid management.

METHODS

The electronic literature was searched for studies reporting outcomes for locally recurrent rectal cancer limited to the English language.

RESULTS

Prospective and retrospective case series and single-center experiences were identified. A total of 106 articles were selected for full-text review of which 82 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No randomized studies were identified. We found that multimodality treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer can improve 5-year survival from 0% to over 40%, and selected patients may survive up to 10 years. A mixture of imaging modalities is used in patient selection for surgery. An R0 resection is consistently a favorable prognostic factor. R1 resection and surgery in the setting of oligometastases compare favorably with nonoperative palliation. Although mortality figures remain low, morbidity is significant and mostly wound related.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvements in radiological imaging modalities and technical improvements in surgical and reconstructive options have facilitated more accurate staging, better selection of patients for surgery, reduced morbidity and mortality, and higher R0 resections. Optimal management is in specialist units with a multidisciplinary approach with the use of multimodal therapy.

Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced rectal cancer is usually treated with preoperative chemoradiation. After chemoradiation and surgery, 15-27% of the patients have no residual viable tumour at pathological examination, a pathological complete response (pCR). This study established whether patients with pCR have better long-term outcome than do those without pCR.

METHODS

In PubMed, Medline, and Embase we identified 27 articles, based on 17 different datasets, for long-term outcome of patients with and without pCR. 14 investigators agreed to provide individual patient data. All patients underwent chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision. Primary outcome was 5-year disease-free survival. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were computed and hazard ratios (HRs) calculated, with the Cox proportional hazards model. Subgroup analyses were done to test for effect modification by other predicting factors. Interstudy heterogeneity was assessed for disease-free survival and overall survival with forest plots and the Q test.

FINDINGS

484 of 3105 included patients had a pCR. Median follow-up for all patients was 48 months (range 0-277). 5-year crude disease-free survival was 83.3% (95% CI 78.8-87.0) for patients with pCR (61/419 patients had disease recurrence) and 65.6% (63.6-68.0) for those without pCR (747/2263; HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34-0.57; p<0.0001). The Q test and forest plots did not suggest significant interstudy variation. The adjusted HR for pCR for failure was 0.54 (95% CI 0.40-0.73), indicating that patients with pCR had a significantly increased probability of disease-free survival. The adjusted HR for disease-free survival for administration of adjuvant chemotherapy was 0.91 (95% CI 0.73-1.12). The effect of pCR on disease-free survival was not modified by other prognostic factors.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with pCR after chemoradiation have better long-term outcome than do those without pCR. pCR might be indicative of a prognostically favourable biological tumour profile with less propensity for local or distant recurrence and improved survival.

FUNDING

None.

Management of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer

Treatment for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer differs significantly from patients with rectal cancer restricted to the mesorectum. Adequate preoperative imaging of the pelvis is therefore important to identify those patients who are candidates for multimodality treatment, including preoperative chemoradiation protocols, intraoperative radiotherapy, and extended surgical resections. Much effort should be made to select patients with these advanced tumors for treatment in specialized referral centers. This has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality and improve long-term survival rates. In this article, we review the best treatment options for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. We also emphasize the necessity of a multidisciplinary team, including a radiologist, radiation oncologist, urologist, surgical oncologist, plastic surgeon, and gynecologist in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with these pelvic tumors.

Combined modality therapy including intraoperative electron irradiation for locally recurrent colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate survival, relapse patterns, and prognostic factors in patients with colorectal cancer relapse treated with curative-intent therapy, including intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From April 1981 through January 2008, 607 patients with recurrent colorectal cancer received IOERT as a component of treatment. IOERT was preceded or followed by external radiation (median dose, 45.5 Gy) in 583 patients (96%). Resection was classified as R0 in 227 (37%), R1 in 224 (37%), and R2 in 156 (26%). The median IOERT dose was 15 Gy (range, 7.5-30 Gy).

RESULTS

Median overall survival was 36 months. Five- and 10-year survival rates were 30% and 16%, respectively. Survival estimates at 5 years were 46%, 27%, and 16% for R0, R1, and R2 resection, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that R0 resection, no prior chemotherapy, and more recent treatment (in the second half of the series) were associated with improved survival. The 3-year cumulative incidence of central, local, and distant relapse was 12%, 23%, and 49%, respectively. Central and local relapse were more common in previously irradiated patients and in those with subtotal resection. Toxicity Grade 3 or higher partially attributable to IOERT was observed in 66 patients (11%). Neuropathy was observed in 94 patients (15%) and was more common with IOERT doses exceeding 12.5 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival and disease control was achievable in patients with locally recurrent colorectal cancer. Continued evaluation of curative-intent, combined-modality therapy that includes IOERT is warranted in this high-risk population.

Abdominosacral resection for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The results of resection of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancers, including sacral resection, were analysed critically.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2007, 353 patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer, all treated in a tertiary referral centre, were identified from a prospective database. Twenty-five patients (eight primary and 17 recurrent tumours) underwent en bloc sacral resection.

RESULTS

A mid-sacral resection was carried out in 12 patients (level S3) and a low sacral resection in 13 (level S4/S5). Nineteen patients had an R0, four an R1 and two an R2 resection. There was no postoperative mortality. Median follow-up was 32 months. Incomplete resection had an independent negative influence on local control (5-year local recurrence rate 42 versus 0 per cent in those with and without incomplete resection; P < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival rate was 30 per cent. Five patients with recurrent tumour had pathological invasion into the sacral bone and none survived beyond 1 year.

CONCLUSION

Abdominosacral resection can be performed in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. Patients who cannot undergo a complete resection or have clear evidence of cortical invasion have a poor prognosis.

Total pelvic exenteration for primary and recurrent malignancies

Introduction

Complete resection is the most important prognostic factor in surgery for pelvic tumors. In locally advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancies, radical margins are sometimes difficult to obtain because of close relation to or growth in adjacent organs/structures. Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is an exenterative operation for these advanced tumors and involves en bloc resection of the rectum, bladder, and internal genital organs (prostate/seminal vesicles or uterus, ovaries and/or vagina).

Methods

Between 1994 and 2008, a TPE was performed in 69 patients with pelvic cancer; 48 with rectal cancer (32 primary and 16 recurrent), 14 with cervical cancer (1 primary and 13 recurrent), 5 with sarcoma (3 primary and 2 recurrent), 1 with primary vaginal, and 1 with recurrent endometrial carcinoma. Ten patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 66 patients with preoperative radiotherapy to induce down-staging. Eighteen patients received IORT because of an incomplete or marginal complete resection.

Results

The median follow-up was 43 (range, 1–196) months. Median duration of surgery was 448 (range, 300–670) minutes, median blood loss was 6,300 (range, 750–21,000) ml, and hospitalization was 17 (range, 4–65) days. Overall major and minor complication rates were 34% and 57%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate was 1%. A complete resection was possible in 75% of all patients, a microscopically incomplete resection (R1) in 16%, and a macroscopically incomplete resection (R2) in 9%. Five-year local control for primary locally advanced rectal cancer, recurrent rectal cancer, and cervical cancer was 89%, 38%, and 64%, respectively. Overall survival after 5 years for primary locally advanced rectal cancer, recurrent rectal cancer, and cervical cancer was 66%, 8%, and 45%.

Conclusions

Total pelvic exenteration is accompanied with considerable morbidity, but good local control and acceptable overall survival justifies the use of this extensive surgical technique in most patients, especially patients with primary locally advanced rectal cancer and recurrent cervical cancer.

Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in an unselected population: quality assessment in a low volume center

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review the results and long-term outcome after total mesorectal excision (TME) for adenocarcinoma of the rectum in an unselected population in a community teaching hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 1996 and 2003, 210 patients with rectal cancer were identified in our prospective database, containing patient characteristics, radiotherapy plans, operation notes, histopathological reports, and follow-up details. An evaluation of prognostic factors for local recurrence, distant metastases, and overall survival was performed.

RESULTS

The mean age at diagnosis was 69 years (range 40-91 years). A total of 145 patients were treated by anterior rectal resection; 65 patients had to undergo an abdominoperineal resection (APR). Anastomotic leakage rate was 5%. Postoperative mortality was 3%. After a median follow-up of 3.6 years, the local recurrence-free rate in patients with microscopically complete resections was 91%. The 5-year overall survival rate was 58%. An increased serum carcinoembryonic antigen, an APR, positive lymph nodes, and an incomplete resection all significantly influenced the 5-year overall survival and local recurrence rate. In a multivariate analysis, age was the most important prognostic factor for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with rectal cancer can safely be treated with TME in a community teaching hospital and leads to a good overall survival and an excellent local control. In patients aged above 80, treatment-related mortality is an important competitive risk factor, which obscures the positive effect of modern rectal cancer treatment.

Radical resection after IORT-containing multimodality treatment is the most important determinant for outcome in patients treated for locally recurrent rectal cancer

Background

The optimal treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is still a matter of debate. This study assessed the outcome of LRRC patients treated with multimodality treatment, consisting of neoadjuvant radio (chemo-) therapy, extended resection, and intraoperative radiotherapy.

Methods

One hundred and forty-seven consecutive patients with LRRC who underwent treatment between 1994 and 2006 were studied. The prognostic values of patient-, tumor- and treatment-related characteristics were tested with uni- and multivariate analysis.

Results

Median overall survival was 28 months (range 0-146 months). Five-year overall, disease-free, and metastasis-free survival and local control (OS, DFS, MFS, and LC respectively) were 31.5%, 34.1%, 49.5% and 54.1% respectively. Radical resection (R0) was obtained in 84 patients (57.2%), microscopically irradical resection (R1) in 34 patients (23.1%), and macroscopically irradical resection (R2) in 29 patients (19.7%). For patients with a radical resection median OS was 59 months and the 5-year OS, DFS, MFS, and LC were 48.4%, 52.3%, 65.5% and 68.9%, respectively. Radical resection was significantly correlated with improved OS, DFS, and LC (P < 0.001). Patients who received re-irradiation or full-course radiotherapy survived significantly longer (P = 0.043) and longer without local recurrence (P = 0.038) or metastasis (P < 0.001) compared to patients who were not re-irradiated.

Conclusions

Radical resection is the most significant predictor of improved survival in patients with LRRC. Neoadjuvant radio (chemo-) therapy is the best option in order to realize a radical resection. Re-irradiation is feasible in patients who already received irradiation as part of the primary rectal cancer treatment.

Reirradiation, surgery and IORT for recurrent rectal cancer in previously irradiated patients

A total of 11 patients with recurrent rectal cancer who had been previously irradiated were treated with preoperative reirradiation (median dose 30Gy), surgery and IORT. This treatment was related with high morbidity, a short pain-free survival (5 months) and poor local control (27% after 3 years), although some patients have long-term distant control and survival.

High MUC2 immunohistochemical expression is a predictor of poor response to preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) in rectal adenocarcinoma

The purpose of this study is to establish if mucoid differentiation is associated with responsiveness to preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) in rectal adenocarcinomas. Thirty-two patients with rectal adenocarcinomas were preoperatively treated with 44 to 46 Gy in 22 to 23 fractions and with 5-fluorouracil (200 to 225 mg/m) before surgery. Mucoid differentiation was searched for both in pre-RCT biopsies with anti-MUC2 antiserum and in postoperative specimens. To evaluate the responsiveness to preoperative RCT, a regression grading was used (grades 0 to 4). Statistical analysis showed a significant negative correlation between immunohistochemical expression of MUC2 in pre-RCT biopsies and regression grade in postoperative specimens (r=-0.529; P=0.002). A significant cutoff value of 60% of MUC2 positive neoplastic cells in pre-RCT biopsies was observed (P=0.018): 13 cases with more than 60% exhibited a poor response to RCT (grade 0 in 5/13, grade 1 in 4/13, grade 2 in 4/13), whereas 19 cases with less than 60% showed a better response to RCT (grade 1 in 6/19, grade 2 in 9/19, grade 3 in 3/19, grade 4 in 1/19).

Preoperative irradiation and surgery for local recurrence of rectal and rectosigmoid cancer. Prognostic factors with regard to survival and further local recurrence

OBJECTIVE

Local recurrence after rectal cancer surgery is an important clinical problem.

METHOD

150 patients with local recurrence after rectal/rectosigmoid cancer, stage M0, underwent surgery after preoperative irradiation (46-50 Gy).

RESULTS

The overall 5-year survival was 27% (44% R0, 38% R1 and 17% R2-stage). Corresponding survival/local recurrence rates were 52%/27% for R0- and 14%/63% for R1-stage. No R2-resected survived 4 years. A normal pretreatment CEA level was significantly associated with increased survival but normalization following preoperative therapy was not associated with an improvement in prognosis. Survival and local recurrence were also significantly influenced by the type of primary operation. Several factors were significant for the prediction of an R0-resection in univariate analysis, but only CEA and symptoms at the time of recurrence predicted an R0-resection in multivariate analysis. A long latency time to recurrence did not significantly influence prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative irradiation and surgery can result in an R0-resection and a long survival in patients with recurrence after initial treatment for rectal or rectosigmoid cancer. Also patients with an R1-resection can benefit from surgery since a substantial number will die without further local recurrence. An R0-resection is the main prognostic factor followed by CEA level, sex and type of primary operation. Normalization of CEA after preoperative treatment is not of prognostic significance. The value of the Norwegian follow-up regimen is questioned.

Pelvic exenteration for primary and recurrent gynaecological malignancies

OBJECTIVE

Analyse the outcome of pelvic exenteration for gynaecological malignancies in a tertiary referral center. Post-operative in-hospital morbidity, long-term morbidity, disease free and overall survival rates were studied.

STUDY DESIGN

Between 1991 and 2004, 42 patients underwent an anterior, total or posterior exenteration for gynaecological malignancies. Follow-up was obtained from patient files; disease free and overall survival were calculated and prognostic factors were studied.

RESULTS

A pelvic exenteration was performed in 14 patients for primary and 28 patients for recurrent gynaecological cancers. In-hospital complications occurred in 19 patients (45%) of whom seven patients needed a reoperation (17%). Late complications occurred in 31 patients (75%); 21 reinterventions were performed (50%). Five-year disease free and overall survival was, respectively, 48 and 52%. Age, type of surgery, histology, localisation of the tumour, lateral wall involvement, completeness of resection and primary versus recurrent cancer were not identified as prognostic factors for recurrence or survival.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival is possible in about 50% of patients after pelvic exenteration for gynaecological cancers, but is associated with significant post-operative morbidity.

Detection and management of extrahepatic colorectal cancer in patients with resectable liver metastases

The presence of extrahepatic disease has a great effect on the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in the liver. FDG-PET scanning is currently the most sensitive way of detecting extrahepatic metastases in such patients. This is supported by 10 studies, which show that FDG-PET scan will discover extrahepatic disease in about one in six patients who have completed standard imaging. Staging laparoscopy is another means of detecting extrahepatic disease. Its role remains undefined especially in patients who have had FDG-PET scans. It should probably be restricted to patients with high clinical risk scores. In terms of treatment, patients with recurrence at the primary colorectal site as well as resectable liver metastases appear to benefit from resection of both sites provided that R0 resections can be obtained. Resection of involved hepatic pedicle lymph nodes in patients with resectable liver metastases is associated with poor outcome. The situation regarding patients with peritoneal and liver metastases bears a strong resemblance to that of primary site recurrence and liver metastases. Very acceptable survival can be expected if the peritoneal disease can be eradicated. Information regarding treatment of lung and liver metastases is the most complete of any of these areas. Good results may be expected if all the disease can be cleared. Caution is required in interpreting claims of good survival when study numbers are small and confidence intervals of data are not provided.

Prognostic and predictive factors after surgical treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer: a single institute experience

OBJECTIVE

Resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after curative resection represents a difficult problem and a surgical challenge. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of resecting the local recurrence of rectal cancer and to analyze factors that might predict curative resection and those that affect survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed in 50 patients who underwent surgical exploration with intent to cure LRRC between April 1998 and April 2005. All of the patients had previously undergone resection of primary rectal adenocarcinoma. Of these patients' charts, operation and pathology reports were reviewed. Primary tumor and treatment details, hospital of initial treatment and TNM stage were registered. The following data were collected concerning the detection of the local recurrence; date of recurrence, symptoms at the time of presentation and diagnostic work-up. Perioperative complication and date of discharge were also gathered. The recurrent tumors were classified as not fixed (F0), fixed at one site (F1) and fixed to two or more sites (F2) according to the preoperative and peroperative findings. Microscopic involvement of surgical margins and localization of recurrence were noted based on pathology reports.

RESULTS

The median time interval between resection of primary tumor and surgery for locally recurrent disease was 24 (4-113) months. In a statistical analysis, initial surgery, complaints of patients, increasing number of sites of the recurrent tumor fixation in the pelvis, location of the recurrent tumor were associated with curative surgery. Curative, negative resection margins were obtained in 24 (48%) of patients; in these patients a median survival of 28 months was achieved, compared to 12 months (p=0.01) in patients with either microscopic or gross residual disease. Primary operation and CEA level at recurrence were also found to be important factors associated with improved survival. There was no operative mortality and, the complication rate was 24%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that many patients with LRRC can be resected with negative margins. The type of primary surgery, symptoms, location, and fixity of recurrent tumor are associated with the increased possibility of carrying out curative resection. Previous surgery and curative surgery are significant predictors of both disease-specific survival and overall survival.

Preliminary results of phase I trial of oral uracil/tegafur (UFT), leucovorin plus irinotecan and radiation therapy for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical attempts for locally recurrent rectal cancer often fail due to local re-recurrence and distant metastasis. Preoperative chemoradiation may enhance better local control and survival. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of oral uracil and tegafur (UFT) plus leucovorin (LV), and irinotecan combined with radiation and determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of the triple drug regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer received escalating doses of irinotecan on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (starting at 30 mg/m2, with 10 mg increments between consecutive cohorts) and fixed doses of UFT (300 mg/m2) plus LV (75 mg/day) on days 3 to 7, 10 to 14, 17 to 21, and 24 to 28. Radiation was given 5 days per week totaling 40 to 50 Gy (2Gy/day).

RESULTS

Six patients were treated at the starting dose, and 2 received the full scheduled chemoradiotherapy. The other 4 patients had grade 3 diarrhea and diarrhea was the DLT. One patient had partial response and he had subsequently radical surgical resection. Median progression free survival for local recurrence was 320 days.

CONCLUSION

Irinotecan plus UFT/LV with concomitant radiotherapy in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer was not feasible due to diarrhea in this setting. Modification of the treatment is needed.

Total pelvic exenteration for primary locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIMS

To report the role of total pelvic exenteration in a series of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancers.

METHODS

In the period 1994-2004, TPE was performed in 35 of 296 patients with primary locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer treated in the Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center; 23 of 176 with primary locally advanced and 12 of 120 with recurrent rectal cancer. All but one patient received pre-operative External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT). After 1997, Intra Operative Radiotherapy (IORT) was performed in case of a resection margin less than 2 mm.

RESULTS

Overall major complication rates were not significantly different between patients with primary and recurrent rectal cancer (26% vs. 50%, p=0.94). The hospital mortality rate was 3%. The 5-year local control and overall survival of patients with primary locally advanced rectal cancer were 88% and 52%, respectively. In patients with recurrent rectal cancer 3-year local control and survival rates were 60% and 32%, respectively. An incomplete resection, preoperative pain and advanced Wanebo stage for recurrent cancer were negative prognostic factors for both local control and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

TPE in primary locally advanced rectal cancer enables good local control and acceptable overall survival, thereby justifying the use of the procedure. Patients with recurrent rectal cancer showed a high rate of major complications, a high distant metastasis rate, and a poor overall survival.

Value of intraoperative radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

PURPOSE

This study was designed to analyze the results of a multimodality treatment using preoperative radiotherapy, followed by surgery and intraoperative radiotherapy in patients with primary locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2002, 123 patients with initial unresectable and locally advanced rectal cancer were identified in our prospective database, containing patient characteristics, radiotherapy plans, operation notes, histopathologic reports, and follow-up details. An evaluation of prognostic factors for local recurrence, distant metastases, and overall survival was performed.

RESULTS

All patients were treated preoperatively with a median dose of 50 Gy radiotherapy. Surgery was performed six to ten weeks after radiotherapy. Twenty-seven patients were treated with intraoperative radiotherapy because margins were incomplete or </=2 mm. Postoperative mortality was 2 percent. The median follow-up of all patients was 25.1 months. The overall five-year local control was 65 percent and the overall five-year survival was 50 percent. Positive lymph nodes and incomplete resections negatively influenced local control and overall survival. Intraoperative radiotherapy improved five-year local control (58 vs. 0 percent, P = 0.016) and overall survival (38 vs. 0 percent, P = 0.026) for patients with R1/2 resections.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented multimodality treatment is feasible with an acceptable mortality and a five-year overall survival of 50 percent. Addition of intraoperative radiotherapy for patients with a narrow or microscopic incomplete resection seems to overrule the unfavorable prognostic histologic finding.

[Results of resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer]

AIMS OF THE STUDY

The treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) remains a difficult and controversial issue. The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess the results of an univocal attitude associating resection of a priori resectable lesions using visceral excisions as required, without sacral excision, but including intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 1989 and 1999, 32 patients underwent resection for LRRC. Twelve had previously undergone abdomino-perineal excision and 22 had received radiotherapy. Twenty-three patients underwent pelvic exenteration (total in 17, with rectus myocutaneous flap in 18). Twenty-five patients underwent IORT.

RESULTS

Three patients (9.3%) died in the early postoperative period and 11 experienced complications (37%). Resections were considered R0 in 6 patients, R1 in 21 patients and R2 in 5 patients. Five-year survival rates, overall and without disability, were respectively 12%, 12% and 5%. Median survivals, overall and without disability, were respectively 22 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Resection of LRRC remains a surgical challenge. It may achieve an average of one-year survival without disability, and hope for a few cures. Improvement of oncologic results might come from a more accurate patient selection.

Oncocytic modifications in rectal adenocarcinomas after radio and chemotherapy

The purpose of the study is to highlight oncocytic modifications in rectal adenocarcinomas and evaluate a possible correlation with preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT). Twenty-eight cases of advanced rectal carcinoma, treated preoperatively by 5-fluorouracil (200-225 mg/m(2)) and 44-46 Gy in 22-23 fractions, were studied. All patients underwent biopsy before RCT. Surgery was performed within 6 weeks after RCT. In all cases oncocytic modifications were searched for on hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and at immunohistochemistry using an antimitochondrial antibody. In addition, in two cases, both pre- and post-RCT tissues were examined at electron microscopy. All tumors were adenocarcinomas. In pre-RCT biopsies, oncocytic changes were difficult to find on H&E, while the antimitochondrial antibody strongly stained numerous neoplastic cells (mean 48.4%). In post-RCT surgical specimens, oncocytic changes were detected in 24 out of 28 cases on H&E and the antimitochondrial antibody stained most of the residual neoplastic cells (mean 76.7%). Ultrastructural examination revealed large and bizarre mitochondria inside tumor cells both in pre- and post-RCT tissues. In conclusion, the present data suggest that rectal adenocarcinomas are "mitochondrion-rich" tumors. After preoperative RCT, residual neoplastic cells acquire a definite oncocytic phenotype.