Medium-term results of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy using irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CAPOX) alone for low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer: Long-term follow-up of a prospective single-arm study

BACKGROUND

Stratified treatment has been recommended for rectal cancer. Our previous multicenter randomized trial showed that low-/intermediate-risk rectal cancer patients did not benefit much from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In our phase II study, we found that stage II/III rectal cancer patients with low-/intermediate risks can be managed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and achieve a good response. The current study aimed to report the long-term survival outcomes in the expanded phase II trial.

METHOD

Consecutive patients diagnosed with mid-low stage II/III rectal cancer with low/intermediate risk factors were included. Four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CAPOX) were given, and MRI was used for tumour response detection. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The secondary endpoints were tumour response to NCT, tumour-related death, and overall survival.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 121 eligible patients. The good tumour response rate based on MRI was 82.6 %, with a pathological complete response (pCR) rate of 18.3 %. The disease-free survival rate was 82.6 %, and the overall survival rate was 96.7 % after a median follow-up time of 40 months. Two patients (1.7 %) suffered local recurrence, and 15 patients (12.4 %) suffered distant metastasis. The median disease-free survival and overall survival were 37 (9-60) and 40 (16-60) months, respectively. Tumour longitudinal length reduction and tumour regression grade on MRI were identified as predictors for poor tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In stage II/III rectal cancer patients with low-/intermediate risks, neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone may result in an acceptable tumour response and disease-free survival. Tumour response might be predicted early.

Identification of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone: Results of a retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) appears in a few clinical studies as an alternative to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) in selected patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of nCT with or without nCRT in patients with LARC and to identify patients who may be suitable for nCT alone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 155 patients with LARC who received neoadjuvant treatment (NT) were retrospectively analysed from January 2016 to June 2021. The patients were divided into two groups: nCRT (n = 101) and nCT (n = 54). More patients with locally advanced disease (cT4, cN+ and magnetic resonance imaging-detected mesorectal fascia [mrMRF] positive [+]) were found in the nCRT group. Patients in the nCRT group received a dose of 50 Gy/25 Fx irradiation with concurrent capecitabine, and the median number of nCT cycles was two. In the nCT group, the median number of cycles was four.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration was 30 months. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in the nCRT group was significantly higher than that in the nCT group (17.5% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.047). A significant difference was observed in the locoregional recurrence rate (LRR); 6.9% in the nCRT group and 16.7% in the nCT group (p = 0.011). Among patients with initial mrMRF (+) status, the LRR in the nCRT group was significantly lower than that in the nCT group (6.1% vs. 20%, p = 0.007), but not in patients with initial mrMRF negative (-) (10.5% in each group, p = 0.647). Compared with the nCT group, a lower LRR was observed in patients in the nCRT group with initial mrMRF (+) converted to mrMRF (-) after NT (5.3% vs. 23%, p = 0.009). No significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding acute toxicity and overall and progression-free survivals. Multivariate analysis showed that nCRT and ypN stage were independent prognostic factors for the development of LRR.

CONCLUSION

Patients with initial mrMRF (-) may be suitable for nCT alone. However, patients with initial mrMRF (+) converted to mrMRF (-) after nCT are still at high risk of LRR, and radiotherapy is recommended. Prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for treatment patients with rectal cancer with adverse prognostic factors: A review

Rectal cancer (RC) is one of the leading tumor location in the structure of the incidence of malignant neoplasms in the Russian Federation and the world. And the standard approach to the treatment of patients with locally advanced forms of RC is preoperative chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) with delayed surgery. The use of such sort of approach in the recent decades has led to the reduction of the frequency of local recurrence up to 10% and even less. However, approximately a third of patients die of distant metastases. In this regard, one of the main tasks in the treatment of patients with locally advanced forms of RC with adverse prognostic factors is the prevention of distant metastasis formation. Early initiation of the systemic therapy before surgery is aimed at solving this issue. Conducting neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) instead of CRT in RC treatment allows to avoid radiation reactions and injuries, occurring in some patients. Two-component oxaliplatin-containing regimens are the most well studied types of NCT in the treatment of patients with non-metastatic RC. In this connection, despite the differences in the treatment regimens and the number of cycles, a good tolerability of the method as well as no effect on the frequency of postoperative complications and in general a satisfactory results comparable to the effects of CRT were observed. The use of NCT in combination with targeted treatment modalities as well as three-component chemotherapy regimens are promising and encouraging treatment options for patients with RC with adverse prognostic factors.

The Evolving Neoadjuvant Treatment Paradigm for Patients with Locoregional mismatch Repair Proficient Rectal Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has included preoperative chemoradiation, total mesorectal excision surgery and post operative adjuvant chemotherapy based on histopathology. The current therapeutic landscape in LARC has many different options with different directions of travel - depending on the goal of treatment. Enthusiasm for delivering total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is increasing in the light of recently published randomised phase III trials - RAPIDO and PRODIGE-23. There is a wide diversity of different potential schedules and a multitude of approaches, which include induction neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with a range of chemotherapy options (CAPEOX, FOLFOX, FOLFOXIRI) and a varying duration of 6-18 weeks, or consolidation NACT. These schedules either precede or follow short-course preoperative radiation therapy (SCPRT) using 5 × 5Gy or long-course chemoradiation (LCCRT) using 45-60Gy respectively. The different strategies of induction and consolidation neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been compared and have similar long-term outcomes, but consolidation chemotherapy may facilitate organ-sparing. The results are driving novel paradigms with both intensification and de-intensification treatment strategies. The ideal combination, sequence or duration of such a TNT approach remains undefined. As yet, there are no robust clinical, genetic, molecular, immune or imaging features (alone or integrated), which either direct or aid these choices. Currently, the selection of neoadjuvant treatment is driven by the impact on avoidance or feasibility of surgery or reducing the risk of metastases rather than prevention of local recurrence. Most believe that TNT will improve overall survival, despite the present lack of evidence. Both the inherent heterogeneity in LARC and the observed range of different responses underline the need for response biomarkers to individually tailor therapy rather than 'a one size fits all' approach.

Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: What We Learned in the Last Two Decades and the Future Perspectives

The advancement in surgical techniques, optimization of systemic chemoradiotherapy, and development of refined diagnostic and imaging modalities have brought a phenomenal shift in the treatment of the locally advanced rectal cancer. Although each therapeutic option has shown substantial progress in their field, it is finding their ideal amalgamation which has baffled the clinician and researchers alike. In the effort to identifying the perfect salutary treatment plan, we have even shifted our attention from the trimodal approach to non-operative "watchful waiting" to more recent individualized care. In this article, we acknowledge the scientific progress in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer and compare the opportunities as well as the obstacles while implementing them clinically. We also explore the current challenges and controversies surrounding the multidisciplinary approach and highlight the new trends and recent advances with an ultimate goal to improve the patients' quality of life.

Early response to upfront neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CAPOX) alone in low- and intermediate-risk rectal cancer: a single-arm phase II trial

BACKGROUND

With local recurrence of rectal cancer continuing to decrease, distant recurrence is becoming a major concern, especially for patients with low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer. Therefore, a new treatment strategy is warranted for these patients. This single-arm phase II trial aimed to assess the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer and explore candidate radiological and clinical parameters for early prediction of tumour response after two cycles of CAPOX.

METHODS

Patients with mid-low stage II/III rectal cancer with low and intermediate risk were examined. The primary outcome was defined as a clinicopathological response by integrating tumour longitudinal length reduction (TLLR) on MRI into pathological tumour regression grade (TRG). After completing NCT, patients with TRG0-2 and TRG3 with a TLLR rate greater than 30 per cent were considered to be responders. Secondary outcomes included pathological complete response (pCR), adverse events and local and distant recurrence.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 61 eligible patients. No patient was converted to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy owing to tumour progression. The clinicopathological response and pCR rates were 78.7 and 21.3 per cent respectively. After two cycles of CAPOX, TLLR, TRG on MRI, and mucosal lesion regression grade on endoscopy had potential discriminative ability (area under the curve greater than 0.7) for predicting both clinicopathological and pathological response.

CONCLUSION

NCT alone achieves good tumour response rates in patients with low- and intermediate-risk stage II/III rectal cancer, and predicting tumour response to NCT is feasible at an early treatment phase.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03666442 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiation as a potential alternative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (Neo-CRT) is the current standard strategy for treating locally advanced rectal cancer. However, it delays the administration of optimal chemotherapy and increases toxicity.

AIM

To compare the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Neo-CT) and Neo-CRT for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

The Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed databases were searched for relevant articles using MESH terms and free words. The hazard ratio of overall survival and the risk ratio (RR) for the pathological complete response, the sphincter preservation rate, and treatment-related adverse events were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies of 60870 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in overall survival [hazard ratio = 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93–1.24; P = 0.19] or the pathological complete response (RR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.61–1.03; P = 0.086) between the Neo-CT and Neo-CRT groups. As compared to the Neo-CRT group, the incidences of anastomotic fistula (RR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.35–0.68; P = 0.000) and temporary colostomy (RR = 0.69, 95%CI = 0.58–0.83; P = 0.000) were significantly lower in the Neo-CT group, with a simultaneous increase in the sphincter preservation rate (RR = 1.07, 95%CI = 1.01–1.13; P = 0.029). However, there was no significant difference in the tumor downstaging rate, overall complications, and urinary complications.

CONCLUSION

Neo-CT administration can lower the incidences of anastomotic fistula and temporary colostomy and increase the sphincter preservation rate as to compared to Neo-CRT and could provide an alternative to chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

Background and purpose

With the advent of more intensive chemotherapy regimens, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has always been questioned due to its inevitable radiation toxicity. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and NACRT.

Materials and methods

Eligible studies were searched using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 31 July 2020, comparing the clinical efficacy of NAC versus NACRT for LARC. Short- and long-term outcomes were determined using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Six studies with 12,812 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis, including 677 patients in the NAC group and 12,135 patients in the NACRT group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of pathological complete response rate (OR=0.62, 95%CI=0.27~1.41), N down-staging rate (OR=1.20, 95%CI=0.25~5.79), R0 resection rate (OR=1.24, 95%CI=0.78~1.98), and local relapse rate (OR=1.12, 95%CI=0.58~2.14). The pooled OR for the total response rate and T down-staging were in favor of NACRT (OR=0.41, 95%CI=0.22~0.76 versus OR=0.67 95%CI=0.52~0.87). However, the pooled OR for the sphincter preservation rate favored NAC compared with NACRT (OR=1.87, 95%CI=1.24~2.81). Moreover, NAC was found to be superior to NACRT in terms of distant metastasis (14.3% vs. 20.4%), but the difference was not significant (OR=0.84, 95%CI=0.31~2.27).

Conclusion

We concluded that NAC was superior to NACRT in terms of the sphincter preservation rate, and non-inferior to NACRT in terms of pCR, N down-staging, R0 resection, local relapse, and distant metastasis. However, the conclusion warrants further validation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-021-02251-0.

Evolution and Current Status of the Multidisciplinary Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

The management of locally advanced rectal cancer has grown in both complexity and quality since the first proctectomy. What once was a malignancy with a fairly consistent treatment algorithm for decades, a recent paradigm shift in the care of these patients has led to a more personalized, multidisciplinary approach with variations in timing, sequence, duration, and potential exclusion of multimodality therapies. This review summarizes the most important evidence behind these developing overarching concepts to provide a context for this paradigm shift.

Predictive factors for early distant metastasis after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Distant relapse is the leading cause of cancer-related death in locally advanced rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) followed by surgery inevitably delays delivery of systemic treatment. Some patients show early distant metastasis before systemic treatment.

AIM

To identify the most effective treatments. We investigated prognostic factors for distant metastasis, especially early distant metastasis, using the standard treatment paradigm to identify the most effective treatments according to recurrence risk.

METHODS

From January 2015 through December 2019, rectal cancer patients who underwent NACRT for having clinical T 3-4 or clinical N 1-2 disease according to the 8^th American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system were included. Radiotherapy was delivered to the whole pelvis with concomitant chemotherapy. Patients received surgery 6-8 wk after completion of NACRT. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered at the physician’s discretion.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients received NACRT. Ninety-three patients (73.2%) underwent surgery. The R0 resection rate was 89.2% in all patients. Pathologic tumor and node downstaging rates were 41.9% and 76.3%. Half the patients (n = 69) received adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery. The 3-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 81.7% and 83.5%. On univariate analyses, poorly differentiated tumors, > 5 cm, involvement of mesorectal fascia (MRF), or presence of extramural involvement (EMVI) were associated with worse DMFS and OS. Five patients showed distant metastasis at their first evaluation after NACRT. Patients with early distant metastasis were more likely to have poorly differentiated tumor (P = 0.025), tumors with involved MRF (P = 0.002), and EMVI (P = 0.012) than those who did not.

CONCLUSION

EMVI, the involvement of MRF, and poor histologic grade were associated with early distant metastasis. In order to control distant metastasis and improve treatment outcome, selective use of neoadjuvant treatment according to individualized risk factors is necessary. Future studies are required to determine effective treatment strategies for patients at high risk for distant metastasis.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Oncologic outcomes

BACKGROUND

the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Only 50% of patients receive the adjuvant treatment due to the surgical complications and toxicity of radiotherapy. Recently, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been investigated in the locally advanced rectal cancer setting, with the aim of guaranteeing an uninterrupted systemic treatment. The objective of the present study was to assess the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery were identified from a prospective database of patients with rectal cancer (cII-III). The primary outcomes were the assessment of the number of R0 resections, the degree of pathologic response, patterns of recurrence and overall and disease-free survival. Treatment schedule: patients received 6-8 cycles of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimides based chemotherapy.

RESULTS

twenty-seven patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were identified. Twenty-six anterior resections and one Hartmann intervention were performed. An R0 resection was performed in 27 (100%) patients and no involvement of the circumferential margin was observed. Complete pathologic response (ypT0N0) was confirmed in four (14.8%) patients. The median follow-up was 35 months (range: 10-81) and four distant recurrences were recorded. Overall and disease-free survival at five years was 85% and 84.7%, respectively. Twenty-seven (100%) patients received all the cycles of chemotherapy, with a mean of six cycles (range 5-8) per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a promising alternative in the locally advanced rectal cancer setting and further phase III clinical trials are clearly warranted.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy without Radiation in Colorectal Cancer

In colon cancer, primary surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy represents the standard of care. In rectal cancer, the standard of care is preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiation, which significantly reduces local recurrence but has no impact on subsequent metastatic disease or overall survival. The administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) before surgery can increase the chance of a curative resection and improves long-term outcomes in patients with liver metastases. Hence, NACT is being explored in both primary rectal and colon cancers as an alternative strategy to shrink the tumor, facilitate a curative resection, and simultaneously counter the risk of metastases. Yet, this lack of clarity regarding the precise aims of NACT (downstaging, maximizing response, or improving survival) is hindering progress. The appropriate cytotoxic agents, the optimal regimen, the number of cycles, or duration of NACT prior to surgery or in the postoperative setting remains undefined. Several potential strategies for integrating NACT are discussed with their advantages and disadvantages.

Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone for the locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review

Neo-adjuvant chemoradiation (NA-CRT) is the standard of management for the locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), achieving very low rates of local recurrence (LR). However, NA-CRT fails to control distant recurrence and improve survival, whilst it is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and increased acute and late toxicity. In recent years, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACTx) appears in the literature as an alternative to NA-CRT in patients with LARC. In the present study, the authors review all current evidence on the specific subject. Following a systematic search of the literature, 25 studies were identified reporting on short- or long-term outcomes of NACTx for LARC. Seventeen studies were prospective or retrospective series, and 8 comparative. Of the comparative studies, one was a randomized control trial (RCT) comparing NACTx to NA-CRT and to the combination of NACTx/NA-CRT, and another a non-randomized study comparing NACTx to NA-CRT. Chemotherapeutic regimens were 5-fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin based. In some of them, irinotecan or/and bevacizumab was added. A pooled analysis showed that NACTx is associated with a mean anastomotic leak rate of 6.8%. In the RCT, postoperative morbidity and overall toxicity was significantly less in the NACTx group. Mean T downstaging (ypStage 0-I) was 49.6%, mean N downstaging 69.6% and mean pathologic complete response (pCR) 10.7%. The RCT showed an inferior pCR rate after NACTx than after NA-CRT, but similar rates of T downstaging. Mean LR was 8.6% and mean distant recurrence 17.2%. Satisfactory survival rates are reported by several studies. NACTx seems to be an alternative to NA-CRT for patients with LARC, associated with low anastomotic leak, adequate tumour downstaging, low LR and rather high survival rates. Further data deriving from high-quality studies are necessary to assess safety and efficacy of NACTx as a substitute to NA-CRT, for at least a subset of patients with LARC.

The 2017 Assisi Think Tank Meeting on rectal cancer: A positioning paper

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSES

To describe current practice in the management of rectal cancer, to identify uncertainties that usually arise in the multidisciplinary team (MDT)'s discussions ('grey zones') and propose next generation studies which may provide answers to them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire on the areas of controversy in managing T2, T3 and T4 rectal cancer was drawn up and distributed to the Rectal-Assisi Think Tank Meeting (ATTM) Expert European Board. Less than 70% agreement on a treatment option was indicated as uncertainty and selected as a 'grey zone'. Topics with large disagreement were selected by the task force group for discussion at the Rectal-ATTM.

RESULTS

The controversial clinical issues that had been identified within cT2-cT3-cT4 needed further investigation. The discussions focused on the role of (1) neoadjuvant therapy and organ preservation on cT2-3a low-middle rectal cancer; (2) neoadjuvant therapy in cT3 low rectal cancer without high risk features; (3) total neoadjuvant therapy, radiotherapy boost and the best chemo-radiotherapy schedule in T4 tumors. A description of each area of investigation and trial proposals are reported.

CONCLUSION

The meeting successfully identified 'grey zones' and, in the light of new evidence, proposed clinical trials for treatment of early, intermediate and advanced stage rectal cancer.

Total neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: Role of systemic chemotherapy

For the past several decades, disease-related outcomes, particularly local recurrence rate, in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer have significantly improved as a result of advancement of surgical technique and implementation of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. However, distant metastasis remains unresolved, being a significant cause of cancer death. To focus on micrometastases early in the course of multimodal treatment, delivering systemic chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting is emerging. Also, driven by patient demand and interest in preserving quality of life, upfront chemotherapy prior to surgery serves as a strategy for organ preservation in the management of rectal cancer. Herein, currently available literature on different methods and strategies of the multimodal approach is critically appraised.

Comparable regional therapeutic effects between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced lower rectal cancer in terms of histopathological analysis

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) for lower rectal cancer is commonly used in many Western countries. NACRT improves local control, but it may also induce anal dysfunction, postoperative complications, and late effects associated with radiation. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for lower rectal cancer has recently been employed to improve these problems, but the local control effect of NAC when compared with NACRT is controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of NAC and NACRT using histopathological analysis. The subjects included 16 patients treated with NAC and 10 patients treated with NACRT prior to surgery. Pathological effects on primary lesions and lymph nodes were evaluated based on fibrosis and tumor depth prior to and following preoperative therapy. In the NAC and NACRT groups, the T downgrade rates were 87.5 and 80%, T depth/F depth ratios were 0.61 and 0.73, pathological T downgrade rates were 25 and 40%, pathological complete response rates were 12.5 and 0% for primary lesions and 33.3 and 37.5% for lymph nodes, and the N conversion rates were 80 and 37.5%. There were no significant differences between the groups. These results suggest that the pathological therapeutic effects of NAC were similar to those of NACRT, and NAC may be effective as an alternative therapy to NACRT.

BACCHUS: A randomised non-comparative phase II study of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC)

BACKGROUND

Chemoradiation (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) are standard treatments for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We evaluated the efficacy/safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) regimens as an alternative prior to total mesorectal excision (TME).

METHODS/DESIGN

This multi-centre, phase II trial in patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defined high-risk LARC (>cT3b, cN2+ or extramural venous invasion) randomised patients (1:1) to FOLFOX + Bevacizumab (Arm 1) or FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab (Arm 2) every 14 days for 6 cycles prior to surgery. Patients were withdrawn if positron emission tomography (PET) standardised uptake value (SUV) after 3 cycles failed to decrease by >30% or increased compared to baseline. Primary endpoint was pathological complete response rate (pCR). Secondary endpoints included adverse events (AE) and toxicity. Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) scores based on "T" and "N" downstaging were calculated.

FINDINGS

Twenty patients aged 18-75 years were randomised. The trial stopped early because of poor accrual. Seventeen patients completed all 6 cycles of NACT. One stopped due to myocardial infarction, 1 poor response on PET (both received CRT) and 1 committed suicide. 11 patients had G3 AE, 1 G4 AE (neutropenia), and 1 G5 (suicide). pCR (the primary endpoint) was 0/10 for Arm 1 and 2/10 for Arm 2 i.e. 2/20 (10%) overall. Median NAR score was 14·9 with 5 (28%), 7 (39%), and 6 (33%) having low, intermediate, or high scores. Surgical morbidity was acceptable (1/18 wound infection, no anastomotic leak/pelvic sepsis/fistulae). The 24-month progression-free survival rate was 75% (95% CI: 60%-85%).

INTERPRETATION

The primary endpoint (pCR rate) was not met. However, FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab achieved promising pCR rates, low NAR scores and was well-tolerated. This regimen is suitable for testing as the novel arm against current standards of SCRT and/or CRT in a future trial.

Phase II trial of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) as perioperative therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The standard strategy for locally advanced lower rectal cancer is chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) in Western countries and TME followed by adjuvant chemotherapy without preoperative treatment in Japan.

METHODS

This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of a preoperative CAPOX chemotherapy regimen without radiation therapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The primary endpoint was 2-year disease-free survival.

RESULTS

The trial enrolled 45 patients from 9 institutions between 2012 and 2014. The mean age was 63.5 (29-74) years; 31 patients were male. Most patients (n = 41) received preoperative chemotherapy (CTx), and the preoperative CTx completion rate was 95.2%. R0 resection after CTx was performed in 41 patients. The pathological complete response rate was 7.3% (3/41). After surgery, 35 patients (85.3%) received adjuvant CTx, and 22 of 35 completed the protocol treatment. The follow-up period ranged from 0.71 to 4.68 years (median 2.86 years). There was recurrence in 13 of 40 patients who underwent R0 resection, and the 2-year disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate were 71.6 and 92.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Here we report the completion rates for neoadjuvant CTx and adjuvant CTx, the pathological complete response rate, and the mid-term prognosis. The results indicate that CAPOX followed by TME may be a safe treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Feasibility of Extended Dissection of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Nodes During Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in Patients with Locally Advanced Lower Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Pilot Study After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND The feasibility of additional dissection of the lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LPLNs) in patients undergoing total mesorectal excision (TME) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is controversial. The use of laparoscopic surgery is also debated. In the present study, we evaluated the utility of laparoscopic dissection of LPLNs during TME for patients with LARC and metastatic LPLNs after NAC, based on our experience with 19 cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-five patients with LARC with swollen LPLNs who underwent laparoscopic TME and LPLN dissection were enrolled in this pilot study. The patients were divided into 2 groups: those patients with NAC (n=19) and without NAC (n=6). Our NAC regimen involved 4 to 6 courses of FOLFOX plus panitumumab, cetuximab, or bevacizumab. RESULTS The operative duration was significantly longer in the NAC group than in the non-NAC group (648 vs. 558 minutes, respectively; P=0.022). The rate of major complications, defined as grade ≥3 according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, was similar between the 2 groups (15.8% vs. 33.3%, respectively; P=0.4016). No conversion to conventional laparotomy occurred in either group. In the NAC group, a histopathological complete response was obtained in 2 patients (10.5%), and a nearly complete response (Tis N0 M0) was observed in one patient (5.3%). Although the operation time was prolonged in the NAC group, the other perioperative factors showed no differences between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic LPLN dissection is feasible in patients with LARC and clinically swollen LPLNs, even after NAC.

Session 2: Are we ready for primary chemotherapy in rectal cancer: who, when, why?

The potential of preoperative chemotherapy in rectal cancer is the subject of investigation in a number of global randomized trials. In this overview and expert discussion, Professor Cervantes summarizes the findings of numerous Phase II trials testing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The crucial points in the next phase of trials include: patient selection, whether radiotherapy can be omitted altogether and whether chemotherapy can be used to augment the initial response to chemoradiotherapy. Finally, with the emergence of Magnetic Resonance Tumour Regression Grade a reliable method for assessing response after initial chemoradiotherapy, we ask if this can be used to drive the use of further selective chemotherapy to augment response.

Contemporary management of locally advanced rectal cancer: Resolving issues, controversies and shifting paradigms

Advancements in rectal cancer treatment have resulted in improvement only in locoregional control and have failed to address distant relapse, which is the predominant mode of treatment failure in rectal cancer. As the efficacy of conventional chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) reaches a plateau, the need for alternative strategies in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has grown in relevance. Several novel strategies have been conceptualized to address this issue, including: 1) neoadjuvant induction and consolidation chemotherapy before CRT; 2) neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone to avoid the sequelae of radiation; and 3) nonoperative management for patients who achieved pathological or clinical complete response after CRT. This article explores the issues, recent advances and paradigm shifts in the management of LARC and emphasizes the need for a personalized treatment plan for each patient based on tumor stage, location, gene expression and quality of life.

MRI assessment and outcomes in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy only for primary rectal cancer: long-term results from the GEMCAD 0801 trial

Background

Primary chemotherapy has been tested as a possible approach for patients with high risk features but predicted clear mesorectal margins on preoperative MRI assessment. This study investigates the prognostic relevance of baseline and post-treatment MRI and pathology staging in rectal cancer patients undergoing primary chemotherapy.

Patients and methods

Forty-six patients with T3 tumour > =2 mm from the mesorectal fascia were prospectively treated with Neoadjuvant Capecitabine, Oxaliplatin and Bevacizumab prior to surgery between 2009 and 2011. The baseline and post-treatment MRI: T, Nodal and Extra-mural venous invasion (EMVI) status were recorded as well as post-treatment MRI Tumour regression grade (TRG) and modified-RECIST assessment of tumour length. The post-treatment pathology (yp) assessments of T3 substage, N, EMVI and TRG status were also recorded. Three-year disease-free survival (DFS) and cumulative incidence of recurrence were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between staging and response on MRI and pathology with survival outcomes.

Results

About 46 patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone for high risk margin safe primary rectal cancer. The median follow-up was 41 months, 5 patients died and 11 patients experienced relapse (2 local, 8 distant and 1 both). In total 23/46 patients were identified with MRI features of EMVI at baseline. mrEMVI positive status carried independent prognostic significance for DFS (P = 0.0097) with a hazard ratio of 31.33 (95% CI: 2.3-425.4). The histopathologic factor that was of independent prognostic importance was a final ypT downstage of ypT3a or less, hazard ratio: 14.0 (95% CI: 1.5-132.5).

Conclusions

mrEMVI is an independent prognostic factor at baseline for poor outcomes in rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy while ≤ypT3a is associated with an improvement in DFS. Future preoperative therapy evaluation in rectal cancer patients will need to stratify treatment according to baseline EMVI status as a crucial risk factor for recurrence in patients with predicted CRM clear rectal cancer.

Inspection of Perirectal Lymph Nodes by One-Step Nucleic Acid Amplification Predicts Lateral Lymph Node Metastasis in Advanced Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is performed for advanced rectal cancers in Japan; however, it can cause sexual and urinary dysfunction. The incidence of lateral LN metastasis is estimated at 7-13.9%; therefore, excessive rectal surgery with LLND should be avoided, especially for prophylactic purposes. To identify the patients who require LLND, we examined metastases in perirectal LNs by using a one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) assay to predict lateral LN metastases.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients who underwent surgery with bilateral LN dissection due to T3-T4 rectal cancers were prospectively included in this study. Twenty-two patients (88.0%) received preoperative chemotherapy. Among 1052 LNs from 25 patients (median 40 per case), 135 perirectal LNs (median 6 per patient) were divided into three pieces and analyzed by OSNA, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for carcinoembryonic antigen mRNA, and pathological examination after surgery. These results were compared with the pathological diagnosis of lateral LNs.

RESULTS

Lateral LN metastases were present in 4 of 25 patients (16.0%). All of these patients were positive by OSNA for perirectal LN metastases. The OSNA assay had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value of 57%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% for predicting lateral LN metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this prospective study suggest that the OSNA assay of perirectal LNs may be useful for determining when LLND is necessary because of its high NPV, even in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy.

Modified FOLFOX6 With or Without Radiation Versus Fluorouracil and Leucovorin With Radiation in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Initial Results of the Chinese FOWARC Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Three-Arm Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

Total mesorectal excision with fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy is a standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer. This study investigated the addition of oxaliplatin with and without preoperative radiotherapy.

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, we randomly assigned (1:1:1) Chinese adults (age 18 to 75 years) with locally advanced stage II/III rectal cancer to three treatments: five 2-week cycles of infusional fluorouracil (leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2), and fluorouracil 2.4 g/m(2) over 48 h) plus radiotherapy (46.0 to 50.4 Gy delivered in 23 to 25 fractions during cycles 2 through 4) followed by surgery and seven cycles of infusional fluorouracil, the same treatment plus intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each cycle (modified FOLFOX6 [mFOLFOX6]), or four to six cycles of mFOLFOX6 followed by surgery and six to eight cycles of mFOLFOX6. Random assignment was performed by using computer-generated block randomization codes. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary end points of histopathologic response and toxicity are reported.

RESULTS

A total of 495 patients were enrolled from June 2010 to February 2015; 475 were evaluable (fluorouracil-radiotherapy, n = 155; mFOLFOX6-radiotherapy, n = 157; mFOLFOX6, n = 163). In the fluorouracil-radiotherapy, mFOLFOX6-radiotherapy, and mFOLFOX6 groups, the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) was 14.0%, 27.5%, and 6.6%, and downstaging (ypStage 0 to 1) was achieved by 37.1%, 56.4%, and 35.5% of patients, respectively. Higher toxicity and more postoperative complications were observed in patients who received radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

mFOLFOX6-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy results in a higher pCR rate than fluorouracil-based treatment. Perioperative mFOLFOX6 alone had inferior results and a lower pCR rate than chemoradiotherapy but led to a similar downstaging rate as fluorouracil-radiotherapy, with less toxicity and fewer postoperative complications.

Review of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Alone in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Currently, the standard management of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by resection. Despite the significant improvement in local recurrence, survival benefits are not gained due to distant failure and radiotherapy-associated toxicity. Compliance to adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy is also poor. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone followed by surgery may be an alternative. The objective of this review is to determine the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in operable LARC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases searched (from database inception-December 2013) were Medline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane library, and the Clinical Trials Register. Specific journals were also hand searched. The selection criteria were studies published in English investigating stage II-III non-metastatic rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (oral, intravenous or rectal route) followed by curative resection. The primary outcome measure was tumour response. Secondary outcome measures included acute toxicity, operative morbidity, R0 resection, local recurrence, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

One randomised phase III trial, six single-arm phase II trials and one retrospective case series study were eligible for inclusion. Six studies administered fluoropyrimidine-based multiple agent regimens and two studies administered fluorouracil-based monotherapy. The studies with multiple agents and stronger chemotherapy regimens (intravenous and/or oral) followed by delayed surgery showed better tumour response rates. The overall objective response rate was good and ranged from 62.5 to 93.7 %. Pathological complete response ranged from 3.8 to 33.3 %. The R0 resection and compliance rates were also high ranging from 90 to 100 % and 72 to 100 %, respectively. Grade 3-4 toxicities ranged from 2.3 to 39 %. Four- to 5-year OS and DFS ranged from 67.2 to 91 % and 60.5 to 84 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This review demonstrates that neoadjuvant chemotherapy could be affectively administered in LARC and could provide a good alternative to chemoradiotherapy in moderate-risk rectal cancers without compromising short- and long-term outcomes.

Early results of multicenter phase II trial of perioperative oxaliplatin and capecitabine without radiotherapy for high-risk rectal cancer: CORONA I study

BACKGROUNDS

Perioperative introduction of developed chemotherapy into the treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) may be a promising option. However, the most prevalent treatment for high-risk LARC remains preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in Western countries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A phase II trial was undertaken to evaluate safety and efficacy of perioperative XELOX without radiotherapy (RT) for patients with high-risk LARC. Patients received 4 cycles of XELOX before and after surgery, respectively. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival.

RESULTS

We enrolled 41 patients between June 2012 and April 2014. The completion rate of the preoperative XELOX was 90.3%. Twenty-nine patients (70.7%) could start postoperative XELOX, 15 of these patients (51.7%) completed 4 cycles. Allergic reaction to oxaliplatin was experienced by 5 patients (17.2%) during postoperative XELOX. One patient received additional RT after preoperative XELOX. Consequently, the remaining 40 patients underwent primary resection. Major complications occurred in 6 of 40 patients (15.0%). Pathological complete response (pCR) rate was 12.2%, and good tumor regression was exhibited in 31.7%. N down-staging (cN+ to ypN0) and T down-staging were detected in 56.7% and 52.5%, respectively. Clinical T4 tumor was a predictor of poor pathological response (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We could show the favorable pCR rate after preoperative XELOX alone. However, the T and N down-staging rate was likely to be insufficient. When tumor regression is essential for curative resection, the use of preoperative CRT is likely to be recommended. For patients with massive LN metastasis, the additional Bev to NAC might be a promising option.

Current topics in the multimodality treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

The multimodality approach to the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer has evolved to include neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy, total mesorectal excision and adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Though this broad strategy has yielded improvements in local control compared with historical data, overall survival remains largely unchanged. Current investigations focus on improving patient selection through new imaging modalities, improving surgical techniques, incorporating more aggressive systemic treatment regimens and the selective use of radiation. Here, we review emerging data regarding newer staging techniques, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, optimal timing of surgery, selective use of radiation and nonoperative approaches to the management of locally advanced rectal cancers.

Timing of Therapies in the Multidisciplinary Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Available Evidence and Implications for Routine Practice

A multimodality disciplinary approach is paramount for the management of locally advanced rectal cancer. Over the last decade, (chemo)radiotherapy followed by surgery plus or minus adjuvant chemotherapy has represented the mainstay of treatment for this disease. Nevertheless, robust evidence suggesting the optimal timing and sequence of therapies in this setting has been overall limited. A number of questions are still unsolved including the length of the interval between neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery or the timing of systemic chemotherapy. Interestingly, emerging data support the contention that altering sequence or timing or both of the components of this multimodality approach may provide an opportunity to implement treatment strategies that far better address the risk and expectations of individual patients. In this article, we review the available evidence on timing of therapies in the multidisciplinary treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer and discuss the potential implications for routine practice that may derive from a change of the currently accepted treatment paradigm.

Which Patients With Rectal Cancer Do Not Need Radiotherapy?

According to current guidelines, the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer patients is preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Improvements in surgical techniques, imaging modalities, chemotherapy regimens, and radiotherapy delivery have reduced local recurrence rates to less than 10%. The current challenge in rectal cancer treatment lies in the prevention of distant metastases, which still occur in more than 25% of the patients. The decrease in local recurrence rates, the need for more effective systemic treatments, and the increased awareness of treatment-induced toxicity raise the question as to whether a more selective use of radiotherapy is advocated.

Neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review

We reviewed the history and the current status of neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in Western countries and Japan. The introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) and preoperative radiotherapy (RT) were treatment revolutions that resulted in improved local control after curative resection for rectal cancer. However, local relapses still occur, even in the era of TME, and remain a cause of recurrence worldwide. The high rate of distant metastasis after curative resection remains a problem. Furthermore, the introduction of newly developed cytotoxic agents into the LARC treatment strategy continues to be an ongoing challenge. Shifting part of an adjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) regimen to the preoperative period is a promising strategy. Currently, various novel methods, such as induction CTx, consolidation CTx, concomitant administration with RT, and neoadjuvant CTx without RT, have been attempted worldwide. Although some strategies have shown favorable short-term outcomes, the long-term efficacy of the treatments needs be evaluated. At the same time, we must investigate clinical and/or molecular biomarkers to predict the therapeutic effects of each treatment, which is the fastest route to providing ideal personalized therapy for patients with LARC.

Rectal cancer: An evidence-based update for primary care providers

Rectal adenocarcinoma is an important cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and key anatomic differences between the rectum and the colon have significant implications for management of rectal cancer. Many advances have been made in the diagnosis and management of rectal cancer. These include clinical staging with imaging studies such as endorectal ultrasound and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, operative approaches such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic and robotic assisted proctectomy, as well as refined neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies. For stage II and III rectal cancers, combined chemoradiotherapy offers the lowest rates of local and distant relapse, and is delivered neoadjuvantly to improve tolerability and optimize surgical outcomes, particularly when sphincter-sparing surgery is an endpoint. The goal in rectal cancer treatment is to optimize disease-free and overall survival while minimizing the risk of local recurrence and toxicity from both radiation and systemic therapy. Optimal patient outcomes depend on multidisciplinary involvement for tailored therapy. The successful management of rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach, with the involvement of enterostomal nurses, gastroenterologists, medical and radiation oncologists, radiologists, pathologists and surgeons. The identification of patients who are candidates for combined modality treatment is particularly useful to optimize outcomes. This article provides an overview of the diagnosis, staging and multimodal therapy of patients with rectal cancer for primary care providers.

Multidisciplinary Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer--An Evolving Landscape?

For many years, the multidisciplinary approach of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision and adjuvant fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy has remained the accepted standard management for locally advanced rectal cancers. Over this time period, many new systemic treatment options have become available, including: additional chemotherapeutic agents (oxaliplatin) and targeted therapies (vascular endothelial growth factor and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors), which can be added to neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens or given in combination with radiotherapy as radio-sensitizing agents. Here we review the current literature, examining emerging data related to the impact of multiple modifications to the standard approach, including the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the addition of new agents to standard chemoradiation, and postoperative fluoropyrimidine-based treatment, the optimal timing of surgery, and nonoperative approaches to the management of locally advanced rectal cancers.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on colorectal cancer (CRC) have been largely studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy and safety of NAC plus surgery with surgery alone (SA) for CRC. We searched systematically databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs comparing NAC and surgery with SA for treating CRC. References of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases were also screened. Primary outcomes included overall and disease-free survivals, total and perioperative mortalities, recurrence, and metastasis. Meta-analysis was performed where possible comparing parameters using relative risks (RRs). Safely analysis was then performed. Outcomes for stages II and III tumors were also meta-analyzed, respectively. Our study was conducted according to intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 6 RCTs comparing NAC (n=1393) with SA (n=1358) published from 2002 to 2012 were identified. Compared with SA, NAC tended to reduce overall recurrences (21.86% vs 25.15%, RR: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-1.56, P=0.09), and prevent vascular invasion (32.30% vs 43.12%, RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.53-1.00, P=0.05); and significantly lowered distant metastasis (15.58% vs 23.80%, RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.50-0.86, P=0.002), especially liver metastasis rate (13.00% vs 18.25%, RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51-0.99, P=0.04), and associated with higher incidence of ypT0-2 cases upon resection (13.04% vs 6.42%, RR: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.02-5.44, P=0.04). All other parameters were comparable. NAC-related side-effects were generally mild. NAC mainly benefited patients with stage III disease. NAC could prevent recurrence and metastasis, associates with better tumor stages upon resection, and potentially impedes vascular invasion among CRC patients. NAC does not contribute to significant survival benefits for CRC, and compares favorably with SA in tumor-free resection rates, nodal status upon resection, and postsurgical complications. This level 1a evidence does not support NAC to obviously outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits for CRC currently.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

ABSTRACT 

Chemoradiotherapy or short-course radiotherapy followed by surgery is a standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. This multimodality strategy has reduced the risk of local recurrence but failed to improve survival. Moreover, mid- and long-term side effects of radiotherapy have been reported. Alternative strategies have been investigated in an attempt to minimize treatment-related toxicities and improve outcome. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy is an attractive therapeutic option that yields theoretical advantages. Moreover, if carefully selected, patients may be spared the effects of radiotherapy without compromising the oncology outcome. The authors review the available evidence on neoadjuvant chemotherapy without radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer and try to anticipate potential algorithms of treatment selection to implement in clinical practice in the future.

The emerging role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer

Locally advanced rectal cancer remains a substantial public health problem. Historically, the disease has been plagued by high rates of both distant and local recurrences. The standardization of pre-operative chemoradiation and transmesorectal excision (TME) have greatly lowered the rates of local recurrence. Efforts to improve treatment through use of more effective radiosensitizing therapies have proven unsuccessful in rectal cancer. Presently, due to improved local therapies, distal recurrences represent the dominant problem in this disease. Adjuvant chemotherapy is currently of established benefit in colorectal cancer. As such, adjuvant chemotherapy, consisting of fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin, represent the standard of care for many patients. However, after pre-operative chemoradiotherapy and rectal surgery, the administration of highly effective chemotherapy regimens has proven difficult. For this reason, novel neoadjuvant approaches represent appealing avenues for investigation. Strategies of neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by chemotherapy are under investigation. Initial encouraging results have been noted, though definitive phase III data is lacking.

Do t3 rectal cancers always need radiochemotherapy?

The limitation of the traditional method of stratifying patients with rectal cancer for prognosis using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computerised tomography (CT)-TNM staging-is that cT3 tumors comprise the vast majority of rectal cancers. There is a wide variability in outcomes for cT3. Despite this observation, many still advocate routine short course preoperative radiotherapy (SCPRT) or chemoradiation (CRT) for all patients staged as cT3N0 regardless of tumour location, proximity to other structures or extent, despite the fact that advances in imaging with MRI now offer the ability to predict potential outcomes in terms of the risk of local and metastatic recurrence for the individual. Preoperative CRT is designed to reduce local recurrence. The majority of local recurrences historically reflected inadequate quality of the mesorectal resection. Currently, optimal quality-controlled surgery in terms of total mesorectal excision (TME) in the trial setting can be associated with much lower local recurrence rates of less than 10 % whether patients receive radiotherapy or not. Because of the high risk of metastatic disease in selected patients, integrating more active chemotherapy is now attractive. Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) achieves shrinkage and sometimes eradication of tumour-i.e. a pathological complete response (pCR), and reduces local recurrence, but has no impact on overall survival. CRT also increases surgical morbidity and impacts on anorectal, urinary and sexual function with an increased risk of second malignancies. Hence, the predominant aims of CRT have been to shrink/downstage a tumour to allow an R0 resection to be performed, or to increase the chances of performing sphincter-sparing surgery. However, it remains unclear why shrinkage/downstaging is meaningful to a patient unless the tumour is initially borderline resectable or unresectable (i.e. the CRM is threatened) or the aim is to perform a lesser operation (i.e. sphincter-sparing or local excision) or for organ-sparing, i.e. to avoid surgery altogether. If it is important to shrink the cancer-ie there is a predicted threat to the CRM, then CRT is currently the treatment of choice. If the cancer is resectable and the aim is simply to lower the risk of local recurrence and preoperative CRT does not impact on survival, can CRT be omitted in selected cases? The answer is yes-with the proviso that we are using good quality MRI and the surgeon is performing good quality TME surgery within the mesorectal plane.

Usefulness of the preoperative administration of tegafur suppositories as alternative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resectable stage II or III colorectal cancer: a KODK4 multicenter randomized control trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and conferred protection against recurrence of preoperatively administered tegafur suppositories following the intravenous and oral administration of fluoropyrimidine in a multicenter randomized control trial.

METHODS

Patients with clinical T3/4 colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to receive the preoperative administration of tegafur suppositories (group A) or no preoperative treatment (group B). The primary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The mean follow-up periods were 80.9 ± 31.0 months in group A and 64.5 ± 28.8 months in group B. The 5-year DFS rates were 89.3% in group A and 70.3% in group B (p = 0.045), whereas the 5-year OS rates were 91.4% in group A and 73.2% in group B (p = 0.051). Furthermore, a significant difference in the cumulative distant metastatic rate was observed (group A, 7.4% vs. group B, 23.4%; p = 0.03). However, no significant difference in the cumulative local recurrence rate was seen (group A, 4.6% vs. group B, 8.2%; p = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

Despite a relatively small sample size, preoperative tegafur suppositories might protect recurrences and improve survival rates, mainly by preventing distant metastasis. These findings suggest the utility of tegafur suppositories as an alternative neoadjuvant treatment in modern chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in MRI-staged high-risk rectal cancer in addition to or as an alternative to preoperative chemoradiation?

BACKGROUND

For patients with resectable rectal cancer chemoradiation (CRT) or short-course preoperative radiotherapy (SCPRT) reduces locoregional failure, without extending disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival (OS). Compliance to postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is poor. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) offers an alternative strategy.

METHODS

A systematic computerised database search identified studies exploring NACT alone or NACT preceding/succeeding radiation. The primary outcome measure was pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary outcome measures included acute toxicity, surgical morbidity, circumferential resection margin, locoregional failure, DFS and OS.

RESULTS

Four case reports, 12 phase I/II studies, 4 randomised phase II and one randomised phase III study evaluated chemotherapy before CRT. Four prospective studies reviewed chemotherapy after CRT. Three phase II studies investigated chemotherapy using FOLFOX plus bevacizumab without radiotherapy. In 24 studies of 1271 patients, pCR varied from 7% to 36%, but with no impact on metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

NACT before CRT delivers does not compromise CRT but has not increased pCR rates, R0 resection rate, improved DFS or reduced metastases. NACT following CRT is an interesting strategy, and the utility of NACT alone could be explored compared with SCPRT or CRT in selected patients with rectal cancer where the impact of radiotherapy on DFS and OS is marginal.

Neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer: do we always need radiotherapy-or can we risk assess locally advanced rectal cancer better?

There is good quality evidence that preoperative radiotherapy reduces local recurrence but there is little impact on overall survival. This is not completely unexpected as radiotherapy is a localised treatment and local control may not prevent systemic failure. Optimal quality-controlled surgery for patients with operable rectal cancer in the trial setting can be associated with local recurrence rates of less than 10 % whether patients receive radiotherapy or not (Quirke et al. 2009). However, despite the reassuring results of randomised trials, concerns remain that radiotherapy increases surgical morbidity (Horisberger et al. 2008; Stelzmueller et al. 2009; Swellengrebel et al. 2011), which can compromise the delivery of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. There are also significant late effects from pelvic radiotherapy (Peeters et al. 2005; Lange et al. 2007) and a risk of second malignancies (Birgisson et al. 2005; van Gijn et al. 2011). If preoperative radiotherapy does not impact on survival, can it be omitted in selected cases? The answer is yes-with the proviso that we are using good quality magnetic resonance imaging and good quality TME surgery within the mesorectal plane and the predicted risk of subsequent metastatic disease justifies its use. In this case, the concept of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is a potentially attractive alternative strategy which might have less early and long-term side effects compared to preoperative radiotherapy-particularly where the MRI predicts a high risk of metastatic disease in the context of a modest risk of local recurrence. This chapter discusses a more precise method of risk categorisation for locally advanced rectal cancer, and discusses possible options for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).