Routine endoscopic surveillance for local recurrence of rectal cancer is futile

Quality of life and symptom burden after rectal cancer surgery: a randomised controlled trial comparing patient-led versus standard follow-up

PURPOSE

After curatively intended rectal cancer (RC) surgery, new follow-up strategies are warranted, seeking more individualised care and targeting health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes. The FURCA trial aimed to investigate the effect of patient-led follow-up on HRQoL and symptom burden 3 years after surgery.

METHODS

RC patients from four Danish centres were randomised 1:1 to intervention (patient-led follow-up with patient education and self-referral to a specialist nurse) or control (standard follow-up with five routine doctor visits). Patients in both groups had a computed tomography (CT) at 1 and 3 years. The primary outcome (HRQoL) was assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - colorectal (FACT-C) score (Ward et al. in Qual Life Res. 8(3):181-95, 18). Secondary outcomes were functional measures, patient involvement and satisfaction and cancer recurrence at 3 years.

RESULTS

From Feb 2016 to Aug 2018, 336 patients were included of whom 248 completed 3 years of follow-up. Between-group differences were found neither for the primary endpoint, nor for functional outcomes. The recurrence rate did not differ between the groups. Patient involvement and satisfaction were higher in the intervention group with statistical significance in almost half of the items.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no effect on HRQoL and symptom burden from patient-led follow-up, although it may improve patient-perceived involvement and satisfaction.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The findings in this study suggest that patient-led follow-up is a more tailored approach to meet cancer survivors' needs and might improve their ability to cope with survivorship.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

R97-A6511-14-S23.

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) in China are increasing in recent years. The clarified pathogenesis and detectable precancerous lesions of CRC make it possible to prevent, screen, and diagnose CRC at an early stage. With the development of endoscopic and surgical techniques, the choice of treatment for early CRC is also worth further discussion, and accordingly, a standard follow-up program after treatment needs to be established.

METHODS

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed following the recommended process of the World Health Organization, adopting Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality, and using the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations, thereby minimizing bias and increasing transparency of the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guides to ensure the guideline's completeness and transparency.

RESULTS

This CPG comprises 46 recommendations concerning prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC. In these recommendations, we have indicated protective and risk factors for CRC and made recommendations for chemoprevention. We proposed a suitable screening program for CRC based on the Chinese context. We also provided normative statements for the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC based on existing clinical evidence and guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The 46 recommendations in this CPG are formed with consideration for stakeholders' values and preferences, feasibility, and acceptability. Recommendations are generalizable to resource-limited settings with similar CRC epidemiology pattern as China.

Low rate of local recurrence detection by rectoscopy in follow-up of rectal cancer

AIM

The main aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of rectoscopy for detecting local recurrence of rectal cancer in patients following low anterior resection.

METHOD

This was a retrospective study of 201 patients, who underwent low anterior resection for rectal or rectosigmoid cancer between 2007 and 2009 and who were followed up with rigid rectoscopy and imaging. A total of 91 patients were excluded from the analysis for various reasons, leaving 110 patients eligible for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 613 rectoscopies were performed, and 48 biopsies taken. Six local recurrences were detected in the 110 patients, three of which were first detected by rectoscopy and three by CT. Two of the local recurrences were detected outside the follow-up programme because of symptoms: one by rectoscopy and one by CT. Three of 613 (0.5%) rectoscopies led to detection of local recurrence. The sensitivity and specificity of rectoscopy to detect local recurrence was 0.50 and 0.93, respectively. Nineteen distant metastases were detected, and two patients had both local recurrence and distant metastasis. All local recurrences and distant metastases were detected within 48 months of surgery.

CONCLUSION

Rigid rectoscopy is poor at detecting local recurrence. Only 3 out of 613 rectoscopies (0.5%) detected local recurrence. Due to extramural growth of some recurrences, the sensitivity is also very low. Based on our results, routine rectoscopy in the surveillance of asymptomatic patients cannot be recommended.

Consensus and controversies regarding follow-up after treatment with curative intent of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer: a synopsis of guidelines used in countries represented in the European Society of Coloproctology

AIM

It is common clinical practice to follow patients for a period of years after treatment with curative intent of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer, but follow-up strategies vary widely. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of recommendations on this topic in guidelines from member countries of the European Society of Coloproctology, with supporting evidence.

METHOD

A systematic search of Medline, Embase and the guideline databases Trip database, BMJ Best Practice and Guidelines International Network was performed. Quality assessment included use of the AGREE-II tool. All topics with recommendations from included guidelines were identified and categorized. For each subtopic, a conclusion was made followed by the degree of consensus and the highest level of evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-one guidelines were included. The majority recommended that structured follow-up should be offered, except for patients in whom treatment of recurrence would be inappropriate. It was generally agreed that clinical visits, measurement of carcinoembryoinc antigen and liver imaging should be part of follow-up, based on a high level of evidence, although the frequency is controversial. There was also consensus on imaging of the chest and pelvis in rectal cancer, as well as endoscopy, based on lower levels of evidence and with a level of intensity that was contradictory.

CONCLUSION

In available guidelines, multimodal follow-up after treatment with curative intent of colorectal cancer is widely recommended, but the exact content and intensity are highly controversial. International agreement on the optimal follow-up schedule is unlikely to be achieved on current evidence, and further research should refocus on individualized 'patient-driven' follow-up and new biomarkers.