Randomized, multicenter, phase IIb study of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in T3 mid-distal rectal cancer: raltitrexed + oxaliplatin + radiotherapy versus cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil + radiotherapy

Treatment Intensification for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Impact on Pathological Complete Response and Outcomes

AIM

Pathological complete response (pCR) and clinical outcomes [overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), locoregional control (LC)] were evaluated in a single-institution experience of different schedules of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for 322 patients with LARC were retrospectively analyzed. pCR was evaluated according to Mandard tumor regression grade (TRG). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate OS, DFS and LC.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three (94.1%) patients underwent surgery. pCR was observed in 81 patients (26.7%), with TRG1-2 rate of 41.8%. The 5- and 10-year OS, DFS and LC rates were 82.5%±2.5% and 65.5%±3.8%, 81.2%±2.4% and 79.3%±2.9%, 93.1%±1.7% and 90.5%±2.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant CRT in LARC patients resulted in favorable long-term oncological outcomes, with a high pCR rate and acceptable toxicity.

Recent advances in (chemo-)radiation therapy for rectal cancer: a comprehensive review

The role of radiation therapy in the treatment of (colo)-rectal cancer has changed dramatically over the past decades. Introduced with the aim of reducing the high rates of local recurrences after conventional surgery, major developments in imaging, surgical technique, systemic therapy and radiation delivery have now created a much more complex environment leading to a more personalized approach. Functional aspects including reduction of acute or late treatment-related side effects, sphincter or even organ-preservation and the unsolved problem of still high distant failure rates have become more important while local recurrence rates can be kept low in the vast majority of patients. This review summarizes the actual role of radiation therapy in different subgroups of patients with rectal cancer, including the current standard approach in different subgroups as well as recent developments focusing on neoadjuvant treatment intensification and/or non-operative treatment approaches aiming at organ-preservation.

The INTERACT Trial: Long-term results of a randomised trial on preoperative capecitabine-based radiochemotherapy intensified by concomitant boost or oxaliplatin, for cT2 (distal)-cT3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Capecitabine-based radiochemotherapy (cbRCT) is standard for preoperative long-course radiochemotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer. This prospective, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial investigated two intensification regimens. cT4 lesions were excluded.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

pathological outcome (TRG 1-2) among arms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Low-located cT2N0-2M0, cT3N0-2M0 (up to 12 cm from anal verge) presentations were treated with cbRCT randomly intensified by either radiotherapy boost (Xelac arm) or multidrug concomitant chemotherapy (Xelox arm). Xelac: concomitant boost to bulky site (45 Gy/1.8 Gy/die, 5 sessions/week to the pelvis, +10 Gy at 1 Gy twice/week to the bulky) plus concurrent capecitabine (1650 mg/mq/die). Xelox: 45 Gy to the pelvis + 5.4 Gy/1.8 Gy/die, 5 sessions/week to the bulky site + concurrent capecitabine (1300 mg/mq/die) and oxaliplatin (130 mg/mq on days 1,19,38). Surgery was planned 7-9 weeks after radiochemotherapy.

RESULTS

From June 2005 to September 2013, 534 patients were analysed: 280 in Xelac, 254 in Xelox arm. Xelox arm presented higher G ≥ 3 haematologic (p = 0.01) and neurologic toxicity (p < 0.001). Overall, 98.5% patients received curative surgery. The tumour regression grade distribution did not differ between arms (p = 0.102). TRG 1+2 rate significantly differed: Xelac arm 61.7% vs. Xelox 52.3% (p = 0.039). Pathological complete response (ypT0N0) rates were 24.4 and 23.8%, respectively (p non-significant). Median follow-up:5.62 years. Five-year disease-free survival rate were 74.7% (Xelac) and 73.8% (Xelox), respectively (p = 0.444). Five-year overall survival rate were 80.4% (Xelac) and 85.5% (Xelox), respectively (p = 0.155).

CONCLUSION

Xelac arm significantly obtained higher TRG1-2 rates. No differences were found about clinical outcome. Because of efficacy on TRG, inferior toxicity and good compliance, Xelac schedules or similar radiotherapy dose intensification schemes could be considered as reference treatments for cT3 lesions.

Preoperative radiotherapy and curative surgery for the management of localised rectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original review published in 2007.Carcinoma of the rectum is a common malignancy, especially in high income countries. Local recurrence may occur after surgery alone. Preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) has the potential to reduce the risk of local recurrence and improve outcomes in rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of preoperative radiotherapy for people with localised resectable rectal cancer compared to surgery alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library; Issue 5, 2018) (4 June 2018), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1950 to 4 June 2018), and Embase (Ovid) (1974 to 4 June 2018). We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for relevant ongoing trials (4 June 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing PRT and surgery with surgery alone for people with localised advanced rectal cancer planned for radical surgery. We excluded trials that did not use contemporary radiotherapy techniques (with more than two fields to the pelvis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the 'Risk of bias' domains for each included trial, and extracted data. For time-to-event data, we calculated the Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) and variances, and for dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) using the random-effects method. Potential sources of heterogeneity hypothesised a priori included study quality, staging, and the use of total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four trials with a total of 4663 participants. All four trials reported short PRT courses, with three trials using 25 Gy in five fractions, and one trial using 20 Gy in four fractions. Only one study specifically required TME surgery for inclusion, whereas in another study 90% of participants received TME surgery.Preoperative radiotherapy probably reduces overall mortality at 4 to 12 years' follow-up (4 trials, 4663 participants; Peto OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.98; moderate-quality evidence). For every 1000 people who undergo surgery alone, 454 would die compared with 45 fewer (the true effect may lie between 77 fewer to 9 fewer) in the PRT group. There was some evidence from subgroup analyses that in trials using TME no or little effect of PRT on survival (P = 0.03 for the difference between subgroups).Preoperative radiotherapy may have little or no effect in reducing cause-specific mortality for rectal cancer (2 trials, 2145 participants; Peto OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; low-quality evidence).We found moderate-quality evidence that PRT reduces local recurrence (4 trials, 4663 participants; Peto OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.57). In absolute terms, 161 out of 1000 patients receiving surgery alone would experience local recurrence compared with 83 fewer with PRT. The results were consistent in TME and non-TME studies.There may be little or no difference in curative resection (4 trials, 4673 participants; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02; low-quality evidence) or in the need for sphincter-sparing surgery (3 trials, 4379 participants; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence) between PRT and surgery alone.Low-quality evidence suggests that PRT may increase the risk of sepsis from 13% to 16% (2 trials, 2698 participants; RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.52) and surgical complications from 25% to 30% (2 trials, 2698 participants; RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42) compared to surgery alone.Two trials evaluated quality of life using different scales. Both studies concluded that sexual dysfunction occurred more in the PRT group. Mixed results were found for faecal incontinence, and irradiated participants tended to resume work later than non-irradiated participants between 6 and 12 months, but this effect had attenuated after 18 months (low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate-quality evidence that PRT reduces overall mortality. Subgroup analysis did not confirm this effect in people undergoing TME surgery. We found consistent evidence that PRT reduces local recurrence. Risk of sepsis and postsurgical complications may be higher with PRT.The main limitation of the findings of the present review concerns their applicability. The included trials only assessed short-course radiotherapy and did not use chemotherapy, which is widely used in the contemporary management of rectal cancer disease. The differences between the trials regarding the criteria used to define rectal cancer, staging, radiotherapy delivered, the time between radiotherapy and surgery, and the use of adjuvant or postoperative therapy did not appear to influence the size of effect across the studies.Future trials should focus on identifying participants that are most likely to benefit from PRT especially in terms of improving local control, sphincter preservation, and overall survival while reducing acute and late toxicities (especially rectal and sexual function), as well as determining the effect of radiotherapy when chemotherapy is used and the optimal timing of surgery following radiotherapy.

Phase 2 Neoadjuvant Treatment Intensification Trials in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Multiple phase 2 trials of neoadjuvant treatment intensification in locally advanced rectal cancer have reported promising efficacy signals, but these have not translated into improved cancer outcomes in phase 3 trials. Improvements in phase 2 trial design are needed to reduce these false-positive signals. This systematic review evaluated the design of phase 2 trials of neoadjuvant long-course radiation or chemoradiation therapy treatment intensification in locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for published phase 2 trials of neoadjuvant treatment intensification from 2004 to 2016. Trial clinical design and outcomes were assessed, with statistical design and compliance rated using a previously published system. Multivariable meta-regression analysis of pathologic complete response (pCR) was conducted.

RESULTS

We identified 92 eligible trials. Patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage II and III equivalent disease were eligible in 87 trials (94.6%). In 43 trials (46.7%), local staging on magnetic resonance imaging was mandated. Only 12 trials (13.0%) were randomized, with 8 having a standard-treatment control arm. Just 51 trials (55.4%) described their statistical design, with 21 trials (22.8%) failing to report their sample size derivation. Most trials (n=84, 91.3%) defined a primary endpoint, but 15 different primary endpoints were used. All trials reported pCR rates. Only 38 trials (41.3%) adequately reported trial statistical design and compliance. Meta-analysis revealed a pooled pCR rate of 17.5% (95% confidence interval, 15.7%-19.4%) across treatment arms of neoadjuvant long-course radiation or chemoradiation therapy treatment intensification and substantial heterogeneity among the reported effect sizes (I² = 55.3%, P<.001). Multivariable meta-regression analysis suggested increased pCR rates with higher radiation therapy doses (adjusted P=.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement in the design of future phase 2 rectal cancer trials is urgently required. A significant increase in randomized trials is essential to overcome selection bias and determine novel schedules suitable for phase 3 testing. This systematic review provides key recommendations to guide future treatment intensification trial design in rectal cancer.

Combination chemotherapy versus single-agent chemotherapy during preoperative chemoradiation for resectable rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer represents 10% of all cancers and is the third most common cause of death in women and men. Almost two-thirds of all bowel cancers are cancers of the colon and over one-third (34%) are cancers of the rectum, including the anus. Surgery is the cornerstone for curative treatment of rectal cancer. Mesorectal excision decreases the rate of local recurrences; however, it does not improve the overall survival of people with locally advanced rectal cancer. There have been significant research efforts since the mid-1990s to optimise the treatment of rectal cancer. Based on the findings of clinical trials, people with T3/T4 or N+ rectal tumours are now being treated preoperatively with radiation and chemotherapy, mainly fluoropyrimidine. However, the incidence of distant metastases remains as high as 30%. Combination chemotherapy regimens, similar to those used in metastatic disease with the addition of oxaliplatin and irinotecan, have been tested to improve the prognosis of people with rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes (including overall survival, disease-free survival and toxicity) between two 5-fluorouracil-containing chemotherapy regimens in people with stage II and III rectal cancer who are receiving preoperative chemoradiation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (January 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2015, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to January 2015), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to January 2015) and LILACS (1982 to January 2015). We reviewed the reference lists of included studies, checked clinical trials registers and handsearched relevant journal proceedings. We applied no language or publication restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing single-agent chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine) versus combination chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine plus another agent including, but not limited to, oxaliplatin) during preoperative radiochemotherapy in people with resectable rectal cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (HMR, EMKS) independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. When necessary, we requested additional information and clarification of published data from the authors of individual trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs involving 3875 people with resectable rectal cancer. In the preoperative period, the participants of these studies were randomised to receive chemoradiation either with a single fluoropyrimidine agent (capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil) or with a combination of drugs (fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin). The only study that reported overall survival and disease-free survival found no significant differences between the intervention and control groups; we considered this evidence very low quality. For pathological complete response after preoperative treatment (ypCR) there was high quality evidence favouring the intervention group (odds ratio (OR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.46), but there was also moderate quality evidence suggesting a higher risk for early toxicity in the intervention group (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.31 to 3.27). Moderate to high quality evidence suggested that the control group had better compliance to radiotherapy (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.75). There were no significant differences between groups in postoperative mortality within 60 days, postoperative morbidity, resection margins, abdominoperineal resection and Hartmann procedures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was very low quality evidence that people with resectable rectal cancer who receive combination preoperative chemotherapy have no improvements in overall survival or disease-free survival. There was high quality evidence that suggested that combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin may improve local tumour control in people with resectable rectal cancer, but this regimen also caused more toxicity. The review included four RCTs but only one reported survival; therefore, we cannot make robust conclusions or useful clinical recommendations. The publication of more survival data from these studies will contribute to future analyses.

Long-term results of a randomized trial in locally advanced rectal cancer: no benefit from adding a brachytherapy boost

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Mature data on tumor control and survival are presented from a randomized trial of the addition of a brachytherapy boost to long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between March 2005 and November 2008, 248 patients with T3-4N0-2M0 rectal cancer were prospectively randomized to either long-course preoperative CRT (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, per oral tegafur-uracil and L-leucovorin) alone or the same CRT schedule plus a brachytherapy boost (10 Gy in 2 fractions). The primary trial endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) at the time of surgery; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and freedom from locoregional failure.

RESULTS

Results for the primary endpoint have previously been reported. This analysis presents survival data for the 224 patients in the Danish part of the trial. In all, 221 patients (111 control arm, 110 brachytherapy boost arm) had data available for analysis, with a median follow-up time of 5.4 years. Despite a significant increase in tumor response at the time of surgery, no differences in 5-year OS (70.6% vs 63.6%, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.24, P=.34) and PFS (63.9% vs 52.0%, HR=1.22, P=.32) were observed. Freedom from locoregional failure at 5 years were 93.9% and 85.7% (HR=2.60, P=.06) in the standard and in the brachytherapy arms, respectively. There was no difference in the prevalence of stoma. Explorative analysis based on stratification for tumor regression grade and resection margin status indicated the presence of response migration.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased pathologic tumor regression at the time of surgery, we observed no benefit on late outcome. Improved tumor regression does not necessarily lead to a relevant clinical benefit when the neoadjuvant treatment is followed by high-quality surgery.

Off-label use of anticancer drugs in eastern Switzerland: a population-based prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Prevalence data on the off-label use (OLU) of anticancer drugs are limited despite OLU being controversial for medical, pharmaco-economic, and ethical reasons. We therefore quantified and characterized the OLU of anticancer drugs and compared OLU based on the national drug label with international treatment recommendations.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy between October and December 2012 at hospitals affiliated with the Eastern Switzerland Oncology Network. Individual data on patient characteristics, tumor disease, and systemic treatment were collected, and each individual treatment was compared with the national drug label and international treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 985 consecutive patients receiving 1,737 anticancer drug treatments were included in the study. Overall, 32.4 % of all patients received at least one off-label drug, corresponding to 27.2 % of all anticancer drugs administered. Major reasons for OLU were the lack of approval for the specific disease entity (15.7 %) and modified application of the anticancer drug (10 %). OLU that was unsupported by the current European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) treatment recommendations was rare (6.6 %) but higher for bevacizumab (29.6 %) due to its use in treating advanced ovarian cancer beyond the second-line setting and advanced breast cancer beyond the first-line setting and for lenalidomide (22.6 %) due to its use in treating Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on data collected on our patient cohort, OLU of anticancer drugs in a European clinical setting applies to one-third of all cancer patients. ESMO-unsupported use of chemotherapies or molecularly-targeted drugs is rare, opposing concerns that the off-label use of newer anticancer drugs is a substantial clinical problem.

Targeting thymidylate synthase in colorectal cancer: critical re-evaluation and emerging therapeutic role of raltitrexed

INTRODUCTION

5-fluorouracil continues to be the cornerstone of treatment for colorectal cancer. Although fluoropyrimidines are generally considered as well-tolerated drugs, severe toxicities can be a major clinical problem, and the recommended prolonged infusion of 5-fluorouracil provokes discomfort in patients. Raltitrexed (Tomudex), a quinazoline analogue of folinic acid, is a selective and direct thymidylate synthase (TS) inhibitor with a convenient 3-weekly schedule of administration.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, through critical insight into the mechanism of action and main clinical experiences, the authors suggest the necessity to reconsider raltitrexed as a valuable anticancer drug and as a suitable option for colorectal cancer. The authors highlight its emerging therapeutic role in clinical practice for patients with fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiotoxicity or a significant history of cardiac disease.

EXPERT OPINION

This review discusses if TS could still be a relevant target for colorectal cancer in the era of molecular therapy and if raltitrexed should still be considered a drug with a life-threatening toxicity. Furthermore, this review discusses the principal combination clinical experiences of raltitrexed and its emerging therapeutic role in clinical practice as a suitable option for colorectal cancer patients with fluoropyrimidine-induced cardiotoxicity or a significant history of cardiac disease.

Long-term results with oral fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with resectable rectal cancer. A single-institution experience

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant 5-FU-based chemoradiotherapy in resectable rectal cancer (RC) is a standard of treatment. The use of oral fluoropyrimidines and new agents such as oxaliplatin may improve efficacy and tolerance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 1999 and 2009, 126 RC patients with T3-T4 and/or N+ disease were given three successive protocols: UFT (32), UFT-oxaliplatin (75) and capecitabine-oxaliplatin (19), alongside 45 Gy of radiotherapy; with surgery 4-6 weeks after. Adjuvant treatment was given in all patients. The primary objective was pathologic complete response (pCR).

RESULTS

Preoperative therapy was well tolerated, with no toxic deaths and a 15% grade 3-4 toxicity rate. Eighty-five percent of patients received the full chemotherapy dose, 56% had an abdominoperineal resection, 6% reinterventions and 57% received the full adjuvant chemotherapy planned. The pCR rate was 13%. The downstaging rate was 80%; 8% had progression of disease. The relapse rate was 20%, with local relapse in 6%. By 5 years of followup, 92% of relapses had occurred. Median follow-up was 73 months, 5- and 10-year disease-free survival rates were 75% and 50%, and 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 79% and 66% respectively. There was no benefit from the use of oxaliplatin regarding survival or pCR rates. Older patients had worse long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with oral fluoropyrimidines and oxaliplatin is feasible and well tolerated. The risk of early progression is low. However, there was no added benefit with the use of oxaliplatin. There were no relapses in patients with pCR. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear.

Therapeutic effect of postoperative radiotherapy in combination with oxaliplatin and 5-Fu in patients with stage Ⅱ/Ⅲ rectal cancer

AIM: To evaluate the dose limited toxicity (DLT), maximal tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD) of oxaliplatin weekly administered with 5FU/leucovorin in combination with concurrent postoperative radiotherapy in patients with stage Ⅱ/Ⅲ rectal cancer.

METHODS: Patients with stage Ⅱ/Ⅲ rectal cancer after radical excision were enrolled. A modified 3+3 dose-escalation design was used for evaluating 3 dose levels (40 mg/m², 50 mg/m² and 60 mg/m²) of oxaliplatin and fixed-dose 5-FU/leucovorin given once weekly, with 50 Gy XRT delivered in 25 fractions of 2 Gy, five times per week over 5 weeks. Patients received oxaliplatin at the assigned dose level, and 5-FU and leucovorin doses were fixed at 600 mg/m² and 200 mg/m² for all cohorts, respectively. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any grade 4 hematologic toxicity (including grade 3 thrombocytopenia) or grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity (except for alopecia).

RESULTS: Nine evaluable patients were enrolled, including 3 treated at 40 mg/m², 3 at 50 mg/m² and 3 at 60 mg/m². At dose level 3, 2 of 3 patients experienced dose-limiting diarrhea and hypodynamia. Another 14 patients received the dose of 50 mg/m² in a phase 2 study. Main toxicities were hematologic, primarily affecting neutrophils and platelets. The most common non-hematologic toxicities were gastrointestinal. None experienced grade 3 or 4 acute toxicities. The 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 86.1% and 63.3%, respectively. The rates of 5-year progression-free survival, local failure and metastasis were 56.9%, 8.5% and 22.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The MTD and RD of oxaliplatin are 60 mg/m² and 50 mg/m², respectively. The DLT includes diarrhea and hypodynamia. The combination of oxaliplatin and 5-Fu weekly with postoperative radiotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging efficacy in patients with stage II/III rectal cancer after radical excision.

ACR appropriateness criteria® resectable rectal cancer

The management of resectable rectal cancer continues to be guided by clinical trials and advances in technique. Although surgical advances including total mesorectal excision continue to decrease rates of local recurrence, the management of locally advanced disease (T3-T4 or N+) benefits from a multimodality approach including neoadjuvant concomitant chemotherapy and radiation. Circumferential resection margin, which can be determined preoperatively via MRI, is prognostic. Toxicity associated with radiation therapy is decreased by placing the patient in the prone position on a belly board, however for patients who cannot tolerate prone positioning, IMRT decreases the volume of normal tissue irradiated. The use of IMRT requires knowledge of the patterns of spreads and anatomy. Clinical trials demonstrate high variability in target delineation without specific guidance demonstrating the need for peer review and the use of a consensus atlas. Concomitant with radiation, fluorouracil based chemotherapy remains the standard, and although toxicity is decreased with continuous infusion fluorouracil, oral capecitabine is non-inferior to the continuous infusion regimen. Additional chemotherapeutic agents, including oxaliplatin, continue to be investigated, however currently should only be utilized on clinical trials as increased toxicity and no definitive benefit has been demonstrated in clinical trials. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every two years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Concomitant boost radiotherapy and multidrug chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer: results of a phase II study

BACKGROUND

An intensified multidrug chemotherapy regimen (raltitrexed plus oxaliplatin, Tom-Ox) plus concomitant boost radiotherapy, in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer patients, was shown feasible in our previous study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy in terms of pathologic complete response to pre-operative therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Phase II study was designed and clinical stage T3-T4 and/ or N ≥ 1 patients were treated with concomitant boost radiotherapy (55 Gy/5 weeks) plus concurrent chemotherapy (Tom-Ox). The primary endpoint was the assessment of efficacy in terms of clinical and pathologic response to pre-operative therapy. According to the Gehan's design study, 25 patients were enrolled. Toxicity was assessed according to the RTOG-EORTC and CTCAE v.3.0 criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-five consecutive patients were treated. Twenty-two of the 25 (88%) patients had a partial clinical response at the time of pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Only one patient showed progressive systemic disease at pre-surgical revaluation and was subjected only to biopsy to evaluate pathological response. Twenty-four patients (96%) underwent surgery. Overall, pathologic complete response was observed in eight patients (32%; CI 0.95:12-55%) and only microscopic tumor foci (pTmic) in two patients (pT0-mic: 40%; CI 0.95:18-63%). Nineteen patients (76%) showed tumor down-staging. Proctitis and/or diarrhea were the most frequent acute side effects experienced. Eighteen patients had grade 1-2 toxicity (77%); whereas two patients experienced grade 3 toxicity (8%). Two-year Local control and actuarial Disease Free Survival were 100% and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSION. An intensified regimen of concomitant boost radiotherapy plus concurrent raltitrexed and oxaliplatin, can be safely administered in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. This regimen produces high rates of pathological complete response. Based on available data, this type of treatment could be offered to patients with more advanced tumors (T4 or local recurrence).

Unique considerations in the patient with rectal cancer

In the past two decades, substantial progress has been made in the adjuvant management of colorectal cancer. Chemotherapy has improved overall survival in patients with node-positive (N+) disease. In contrast with colon cancer, which has a low incidence of local recurrence, patients with rectal cancer have a higher incidence requiring the addition of pelvic radiation therapy (chemoradiation). Patients with rectal cancer have a number of unique management considerations: for example, the role of short-course radiation, whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is necessary for all patients, and if the type of surgery following chemoradiation should be based on the response rate. More accurate imaging techniques and/or molecular markers may help identify patients with positive pelvic nodes to reduce the chance of overtreatment with preoperative therapy. Will more effective systemic agents both improve the results of radiation as well as modify the need for pelvic radiation? This review will address these and other controversies specific to patients with rectal cancer.

Workshop report: A practical approach and general principles of re-irradiation for in-field cancer recurrence

In-field cancer recurrence after previous adjuvant or radical radiotherapy presents particularly challenging clinical issues to the oncologists. A Canadian pattern of practice survey showed a wide range of approaches in treatment intent, planning and dose fractionation. A workshop on re-irradiation was conducted at the 2009 Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology annual scientific meeting, under the guidance of the Symptom Control Committee, in an effort to promote a uniform approach among radiation oncologists in their approach to re-irradiation. The workshop has made various recommendations in an effort to bring consistency among radiation oncologists across Canada to their approach towards re-irradiation.

Chemoradiation for rectal cancer: rationale, approaches, and controversies

The standard adjuvant treatment of cT3 and/or N+ rectal cancer is preoperative chemoradiation. However, there are many controversies regarding this approach. These controversies include the role of short course radiation, whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is necessary for all patients, and if the type of surgery following chemoradiation should be based on the response rate. More accurate imaging techniques and/or molecular markers may help identify patients with positive pelvic nodes to reduce the chance of overtreatment with preoperative therapy. Will more effective systemic agents both improve the results of radiation, as well as modify the need for pelvic radiation? These questions and others remain active areas of clinical investigation.

Restaging locally advanced rectal cancer with MR imaging after chemoradiation therapy

In recent years, preoperative therapy has become standard procedure for locally advanced rectal cancer. Tumor shrinkage due to preoperative chemotherapy-radiation therapy (CRT) is now a reality, and pathologically complete responses are not uncommon. Some researchers are now addressing organ preservation, thus increasing the demand for both functional and morphologic radiologic evaluation of response to CRT to distinguish responding from nonresponding tumors. On magnetic resonance (MR) images, post-CRT tumor morphologic features and volume changes have a high positive predictive value but a low negative predictive value for assessing response. Preliminary results indicate that diffusion-weighted MR imaging, especially at high b values, would be effective for prediction of treatment outcome and for early detection of tumor response. Some authors have reported that the use of apparent diffusion coefficient values in combination with other MR imaging criteria significantly improves discrimination between malignant and benign lymph nodes. Sequential determination of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake at positron emission tomography/computed tomography has proved useful in differentiating responding from nonresponding tumors during and at the end of CRT. However, radionuclide techniques have limitations, such as low spatial resolution and high cost. Large studies will be needed to verify the most effective morphologic and functional imaging modalities for post-CRT restaging of rectal cancer. Supplemental material available at http://radiographics.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/rg.303095085/-/DC1.

Combined modality therapy for rectal cancer

The standard adjuvant treatment for cT3 and/or N+ rectal cancer is preoperative chemoradiation. However, there are many controversies regarding this approach. These include the role of short course radiation, whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy necessary for all patients and whether the type of surgery after chemoradiation should be based on the response rate. More accurate imaging techniques and/or molecular markers may help identify patients with positive pelvic nodes to reduce the chance of overtreatment with preoperative therapy. Will more effective systemic agents both improve the results of radiation as well as modify the need for pelvic radiation? These questions and others remain active areas of clinical investigation.

Value of ADC measurements for nodal staging after chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer-a per lesion validation study

Objectives

To evaluate the performance of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in addition to T2-weighted (T2W) MRI for nodal restaging after chemoradiation in rectal cancer.

Methods

Thirty patients underwent chemoradiation followed by MRI (1.5 T) and surgery. Imaging consisted of T2W-MRI and DWI (b0, 500, 1000). On T2W-MRI, nodes were scored as benign/malignant by two independent readers (R1, R2). Mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was measured for each node. Diagnostic performance was compared for T2W-MRI, ADC and T2W+ADC, using a per lesion histological validation.

Results

ADC was higher for the malignant nodes (1.43 ± 0.38 vs 1.19 ± 0.27 *10⁻³ mm²/s, p < 0.001). Area under the ROC curve/sensitivity/specificity were 0.88/65%/93% (R1) and 0.95/71%/91% (R2) using T2W-MRI; 0.66/53%/82% using ADC (mean of two readers); and 0.91/56%/98% (R1) and 0.96/56%/99% (R2) using T2W+ADC. There was no significant difference between T2W-MRI and T2W+ADC. Interobserver reproducibility was good for T2W-MRI (κ0.73) and ADC (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.77).

Conclusions

After chemoradiation, ADC measurements may have potential for nodal characterisation, but DWI on its own is not reliable. Addition of DWI to T2W-MRI does not improve accuracy and T2W-MRI is already sufficiently accurate.

Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review was designed to determine postoperative complication rates of radical surgery for rectal cancer (abdominal perineal resection and anterior resection).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lack of accepted complication rates for rectal cancer surgery may hinder quality improvement efforts and may impede the conception of future studies because of uncertainty regarding the expected event rates.

METHODS

All prospective studies of rectal cancer receiving radical surgery published between 1990 and August 2008 were obtained by searching Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, as well as ASCO GI, CAGS, and ASCRS meeting abstracts between 2004 and 2008. There was no language restriction. The outcomes extracted were anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, postoperative death, wound infection, and fecal incontinence. Summary complication rates were obtained using a random effects model; the Z-test was used to test for study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifty-three prospective cohort studies and 45 randomized controlled studies with 36,315 patients (24,845 patients had an anastomosis) were eligible for inclusion. Most of the studies found were based in continental Europe (58%), followed by Asia (25%), United Kingdom (10%), North America (5%), and Australia/New Zealand. The anastomotic leak rate, reported in 84 studies, was 11% (95% CI: 10, 12); the pelvic sepsis rate, in 29 studies, was 12% (9, 16); the postoperative death rate, in 75 studies, was 2% (2, 3); and the wound infection rate, in 50 studies, was 7% (5, 8). Fecal incontinence rates were reported in too few studies and so heterogeneously that numerical summarization was inappropriate. Year of publication, use of preoperative radiation, use of laparoscopy, and use of protecting stoma were not significant variables, but average age, median tumor height, and method of detection (clinical vs. radiologic) showed significance to explain heterogeneity in anastomotic leak rates. Year of publication, study origin, average age, and use of laparoscopy were significant, but median tumor height and preoperative radiation use were not significant in explaining heterogeneity among observed postoperative death rates. With multivariable analysis, only average age for anastomotic leak and year of publication for postoperative death remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Benchmark complication rates for radical rectal cancer surgery were obtained for use in sample size calculations in future studies and for quality control purposes. Postoperative death rates showed improvement in recent years.

Management of rectal cancer: short- vs. long-course preoperative radiation

There is considerable debate on the optimum approach to neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer. This review of major published studies of short-course preoperative radiation and the more conventional approach of long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation was undertaken in an effort to understand the potential advantages and disadvantages of each of these approaches. Studies were evaluated with regard to patient selection, clinical outcomes, and toxicities. Short-course preoperative radiation has shown a clear advantage over surgery alone in reducing local recurrence rates and improving survival of patients with rectal cancer. However, studies using short-course preoperative treatment have included a significant number of early (30%; Stage I/II) and more proximal cancers yet appear to have higher positive margin rates, higher abdominoperineal resection rates, and lower aggregate survival than patients treated with long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Although long-course preoperative chemoradiation is associated with higher rates of reversible acute toxicity, there appears to be more significant and a higher rate of late gastrointestinal toxicity observed in short-course preoperative radiation studies. Patient convenience and lower cost of treatment, however, can be a significant advantage in using a short-course treatment schedule. Selective utilization of either of these approaches should be based on extent of disease and goals of treatment. Patients with distal cancers or more advanced disease (T3/T4) appear to have better outcomes with neoadjuvant chemoradiation, especially where downstaging of disease is critical for more complete surgical resection and sphincter preservation.

Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: long-term analysis of 566 ypCR patients

PURPOSE

In the literature, a favorable prognosis was observed for complete pathologic response after preoperative therapy (ypCR) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study is to verify whether ypCR predicts a favorable outcome in a large series of patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Gastro-Intestinal Working Group of the Italian Association of Radiation Oncology collected clinical data for 566 patients with ypCR (ypT0N0) after neoadjuvant therapy. Eligibility criteria included locally advanced rectal cancer with no evidence of metastases at the time of diagnosis, evidence of ypCR after preoperative radiotherapy +/- chemotherapy (CT).

RESULTS

Median radiation dose was 50 Gy. A total of 527 patients (93%) received one of 12 different neoadjuvant CT schedules. Sphincter preservation, anteroposterior resection, and endoscopic surgery were performed in 73%, 22%, and 5% of patients, respectively. Adjuvant CT was administered to 22% of patients. Median follow-up was 46.4 months. Locoregional recurrence occurred in 7 patients (1.6%). Distant metastases occurred in 49 patients (8.9%). Overall, 5-year rates of disease-free survival, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival were 85%, 90%, and 94%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, only age and clinical stage statistically correlated with survival outcome. Adjuvant CT was still of borderline significance (worse for adjuvant CT). No relation was found between survival and neoadjuvant CT schedules.

CONCLUSION

A ypCR after neoadjuvant therapy identified a favorable group of patients, even in this large series of 566 patients collected in 61 centers. Locoregional recurrence occurred only in 1.6% patients.