The Evolving Field of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally-advanced Rectal Cancer: Evidence and Prospects

Compare clinical efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in the treatment of middle and low locally advanced rectal cancer. Our study will systematically collect and integrate studies to evaluate the ability of these two treatments to improve tumor shrinkage rates, surgical resection rates, tumor-free survival, and severe adverse events.

AIM

To provide clinicians and patients with more reliable treatment options to optimize treatment outcomes and quality of life for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer by comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the two treatment options.

METHODS

A full search of all clinical studies on the effectiveness and safety of TNT and nCRT for treating locally advanced rectal cancer identified in Chinese (CNKI, Wanfang, China Biomedical Literature Database) and English (PubMed, Embase) databases was performed. Two system assessors independently screened the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality evaluation and data extraction were performed for the included literature. We used RevMan 5.3 software to perform a meta-analysis of the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, T stage degradation rate, resection 0 (R0) rate, anal grade 3/4 acute toxicity rate, perioperative complications, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in the TNT and nCRT groups.

RESULTS

Finally, 14 studies were included, six of which were randomized controlled studies. A total of 3797 patients were included, including 1865 in the TNT group and 1932 in the nCRT group. The two sets of baseline data were comparable. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pCR rate [odds ratio (OR) = 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-1.90, P < 0.00001], T stage degradation rate (OR = 2.16, 95%CI: 1.63-2.57, P < 0.00001), and R0 resection rate (OR = 1.42, 95%CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009) were significantly greater in the nCRT group than in the nCRT group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade 3/4 acute toxicity or perioperative complications between the two groups. The 5-year OS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84, 95%CI: 0.69-1.02, P = 0.08] and DFS (HR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.03-1.39, P = 0.74) of the TNT group were similar to those of the nCRT group.

CONCLUSION

TNT has greater clinical efficacy and safety than nCRT in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Novel biomarkers to predict treatment response and prognosis in locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

To identify genes associated with treatment response and prognosis for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT).

METHODS

In our cohort, gene expression profiles of 64 tumor biopsy samples before NCRT were examined and generated. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis was performed to identify gene modules. External validation datasets included GSE3493, GSE119409, and GSE133057. The expression of candidate genes was evaluated using immunohistochemistry (IHC). TIMER was used to assess immune infiltration.

RESULTS

We identified and validated the capability to predict the treatment response of CCT5 and ELF1 using our data and external validation datasets. The trends of survival differences of candidate genes in the GSE133057 dataset were similar to our cohort. High levels of CCT5 and ELF1 expression were associated with NCRT resistance and poor prognosis. Furthermore, the expression of CCT5 and ELF1 were also assessed in 117 LARC patients' samples by the IHC method. Based on IHC results and Cox analysis, the risk score model with CCT5 and ELF1 was constructed and performed well. The risk score was an independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival and overall survival in LARC patients and was then used to build nomogram models. The underlying mechanisms of CCT5 and ELF1 were explored using gene set enrichment analysis. The underlying pathway including apoptosis, cell cycle, and other processes. CCT5 and ELF1 expressions were significantly correlated with immune cell infiltration.

CONCLUSION

CCT5 and ELF1 were determined as biomarkers for treatment response and prognosis in LARC patients. The risk score model and nomograms helped predict treatment response and survival outcomes for LARC patients undergoing NCRT.

Short-Course Radiotherapy Followed by Consolidation Chemotherapy Is Safe and Effective in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Comparative Short-term Results of Multicenter Propensity Score Case-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Consolidation chemotherapy strategies have demonstrated improved pathological complete response and tumor downstaging rates for patients diagnosed with rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes and pathological complete response rates among different neoadjuvant treatment strategies in patients undergoing total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer.

DESIGN

Propensity score case-matched study.

SETTING

High-volume tertiary care centers.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients undergoing curative total mesorectal excision between January 2014 and June 2021 were queried.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were divided into 3 groups: long-course chemoradiation therapy with (N = 128) or without (N = 164) consolidation chemotherapy or short-course radiotherapy (N = 53) followed by consolidation chemotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographics, preoperative tumor characteristics, histopathologic outcomes, and postoperative complication rates were reviewed and compared. Propensity score match analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients (mean age: 58 ± 12 years; female: 36%) met the study inclusion criteria. Time interval from neoadjuvant treatment until surgery was longer for patients receiving consolidation chemotherapy ( p < 0.001). Pathological complete response rates were comparable among patients receiving long-course chemoradiation therapy (20.3%) and short-course radiotherapy with consolidation chemotherapy (20.8%) compared to long-course chemoradiation therapy alone (14.6%) ( p = 0.36). After the propensity score case-matched analysis, 48 patients in the long-course chemoradiation therapy with consolidation chemotherapy group were matched to 48 patients in the short-course radiotherapy with consolidation chemotherapy group. Groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, clinical stage, tumor location, type of surgical approach, and technique. Pathological complete response rate was comparable between the groups (20.8% and 18.8%, p = 0.99).

LIMITATIONS

Study was limited by its retrospective nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Among recent neoadjuvant treatment modalities, pathological complete response rates, and short-term clinical outcomes were comparable. Short-course radiotherapy with consolidation chemotherapy is safe and effective as long-course chemoradiation therapy as in a short-term period. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C174 .

LA RADIOTERAPIA DE CORTA DURACIN SEGUIDA DE QUIMIOTERAPIA DE CONSOLIDACIN ES SEGURA Y EFICAZ EN EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO RESULTADOS COMPARATIVOS A CORTO PLAZO DEL ESTUDIO MULTICNTRICO DE CASOS EMPAREJADOS POR PUNTAJE DE PROPENSION

ANTECEDENTES: Las estrategias de quimioterapia de consolidación han demostrado una mejor respuesta patológica completa y tasas de reducción del estadio del tumor para pacientes diagnosticados con cáncer de recto.OBJETIVO: Comparar los resultados perioperatorios y las tasas de respuesta patológica completa entre diferentes estrategias de tratamiento neoadyuvante en pacientes sometidos a escisión mesorrectal total por cáncer de recto localmente avanzado.DISEÑO: Estudio de casos emparejados por puntaje de propensión.ENTORNO CLINICO: Centros de atención terciaria de alto volumen.PACIENTES: Pacientes consecutivos sometidos a escisión mesorrectal total curativa por cáncer de recto localmente avanzado entre enero de 2014 y junio de 2021.INTERVENCIONES: Los pacientes se dividieron en tres grupos según la modalidad de tratamiento neoadyuvante: quimiorradioterapia de ciclo largo con (N = 128) o sin (N = 164) quimioterapia de consolidación o radioterapia de ciclo corto (N = 53) seguida de quimioterapia de consolidación.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: El punto final primario fue la respuesta patológica completa. Se revisaron y compararon los datos demográficos, las características preoperatorias del tumor, los resultados histopatológicos y las tasas de complicaciones posoperatorias entre los grupos de estudio. Se realizó un análisis de casos emparejados por puntaje de propensión.RESULTADOS: Un total de 345 pacientes (edad media de 58 ± 12 años y mujeres: 36%) cumplieron los criterios de inclusión del estudio. El intervalo de tiempo desde el tratamiento neoadyuvante hasta la cirugía fue mayor para los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia de consolidación ( p < 0,001). Las tasas de respuesta patológica completa fueron comparables entre los pacientes que recibieron quimiorradioterapia de larga duración con quimioterapia de consolidación (20,3 %) y radioterapia de corta duración con quimioterapia de consolidación (20,8%) en comparación con la quimiorradiación de larga duración sola (14,6%) ( p = 0,36). Después del análisis de casos emparejados por puntaje de propensión, 48 pacientes en el grupo de quimiorradioterapia de ciclo largo con quimioterapia de consolidación se emparejaron con 48 pacientes en el grupo de radioterapia de ciclo corto con quimioterapia de consolidación. Los grupos fueron comparables con respecto a la edad, sexo, estadio clínico, ubicación del tumor, tipo de abordaje quirúrgico y la técnica. La tasa de respuesta patológica completa fue comparable entre los grupos (20,8% y 18,8%, p = 0,99). La morbilidad postoperatoria a los 30 días y las tasas de fuga anastomótica fueron similares.LIMITACIONES: El estudio estuvo limitado por su naturaleza retrospectiva.CONCLUSIONES: Entre las modalidades de tratamiento neoadyuvante recientes, las tasas de respuesta patológica completa y los resultados clínicos a corto plazo fueron comparables. La radioterapia de corta duración con quimioterapia de consolidación es segura y eficaz como terapia de quimiorradioterapia de larga duración en un período corto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C174 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Meta-analysis of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for non-metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Immunotherapy has been approved for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. The efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for the treatment of non-metastatic colorectal cancer remains unclear. We tried to explore clinical effect of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in the treatment of non-metastatic colorectal cancer.

Methods

We searched the databases (PubMed, Wanfang Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases) to obtain suitable articles up to September 2022. The primary outcomes of pathological complete response (pCRs), major pathological response (MPR), objective response rate (ORR), R0-resection and anus preserving rate were collected and evaluated. Secordary outcomes (pCRs and MPR) of subgroup analysis between deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high group (dMMR/MSI-H) and proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite stable group (pMMR/MSS) and outcomes for rectal cancer were analyzed for the final results.

Results

We included ten articles and 410 cases of non-metastatic colorectal cancer with neoadjuvant immunotherapy. There were 113 (27.5%) cases with the dMMR/MSI-H status and 167 (40.7%) cases with the pMMR/MSS status. pCRs was found in 167/373 (44.6%) patients (ES: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.62, P<0.01, chi² = 65.3, P<0.01, I ² = 86.2%) and MPR was found in 194/304 (63.8%) patients (ES: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.78, P<0.01, chi² = 42.55, P<0.01, I ² = 81.2%) with the random-effects model and huge heterogeneity. In the subgroup analysis, pCRs was higher in the dMMR/MSI-H group than the pMMR/MSS group in the fixed-effects model with minimal heterogeneity (OR: 3.55, 95% CI: 1.74 to 7.27, P<0.01, chi² = 1.86, P=0.6, I ² = 0%). pCRs was found in 58/172 (33.9%) rectal cancer patients (ES: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.40, P<0.01, chi² = 3.04, P=0.55, I ² = 0%) with the fixed-effects model and little heterogeneity.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy could increase pCRs and MPR rate for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy could achieve better pCRs rate in dMMR/MSI-H group than in the pMMR/MSS group. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy could be another treatment option for non-metastatic colorectal cancer.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#myprospero, identifier CRD42022350523.

Clinical feasibility of the therapeutic strategies total neoadjuvant therapy and "watch and wait" in the treatment of rectal cancer patients with recurrence after clinical complete response

Purpose

In recent years, total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has emerged as a new therapeutic strategy against advanced rectal cancer (RC). After administration of TNT, some patients show complete clinical response (cCR) to treatment however, disputes about the effects of TNT and the alternative treatment plans in case of recurrence after cCR still exist.

Methods

A total of 100 patients were included in this paper. CR and non-CR was observed when these patients were administered with TNT at the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, China from May 2015 to June 2021. These patients received different chemotherapeutic regimens, with close monitoring and watch and wait (W&W) strategy being applied by a multidisciplinary team (MDT). According to treatment results, patients were divided into a cCR group and a non-cCR group; according to the recurrence during W&W, they were divided into a recurrence group and a no-local-recurrence group. This study analyzed the factors that may affect the prognosis, and summarized the surgery and treatment after recurrence.

Results

The TNT strategy was effective, and 85% of patients achieved local remission. However, W&W did not affect the survival time of CR patients, nor did it cause new distant metastasis due to local recurrence during the observation period (P > 0.05). However, for patients with positive CRM, we do not recommend W&W as the first choice of treatment (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

(1) Whole-course neoadjuvant therapy was an effective treatment scheme for advanced mid-term rectal cancer. The total local reduction rate of this group of cases was 85.00%, meaning that 25 patients achieved CR. (2) W&W was safe and reliable, and CR patients could receive it as the preferred treatment. (3) CRM was an independent risk factor for local recurrence in CR patients. We do not recommend W&W as the preferred treatment for CR patients with positive CRM.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine and triweekly oxaliplatin versus capecitabine monotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: a propensity-score matched study

Background

Distant metastasis has been the main failure pattern for locoregionally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients, and intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy has become a popular research topic. The present study aimed to compare the survival outcomes, acute toxicities and surgical complications in LARC patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy with triweekly oxaliplatin and capecitabine (triweekly XELOX) or capecitabine.

Methods: Between 2007 and 2017, patients with clinically staged II-III rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy using either triweekly XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² plus capecitabine 825 mg/m²) or capecitabine were included. Variables potentially influencing chemotherapy treatment selection were used to generate propensity scores (PS). The association between chemotherapy regimens and survival endpoints, including distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), were evaluated and adjusted with PS. The acute toxicities and surgical complications were also compared.

Results

A total of 810 patients were included in the analysis; 277 (34.2%) patients received triweekly XELOX, and 533 (65.8%) received capecitabine. The pathological complete response (pCR) rates were 20.2 and 19.9% (P = 0.912) for the groups treated with triweekly XELOX and capecitabine, respectively. The 5-year DMFS, OS and DFS with triweekly XELOX versus capecitabine were 75.6% vs. 77.6% (P = 0.555), 79.2% vs. 83.3% (P = 0.101), and 69.9% vs. 73.7% (P = 0.283), respectively. Triweekly XELOX was not associated with an increased risk of severe toxicity during chemoradiotherapy, but it increased the risk of postoperative complications compared to capecitabine. After PS adjustment, the differences between the two groups remained insignificant in pCR rate, survival outcomes, and acute toxicities, and the difference in surgical complications disappeared.

Conclusions

Triweekly XELOX or capecitabine concurrent with neoadjuvant radiotherapy leads to similar long-term survival outcomes, acute toxicities and surgical complications in LARC patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09855-z.