Neoadjuvant treatment does not influence perioperative outcome in rectal cancer surgery

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus surgery alone for advanced low rectal cancer: a large multicenter cohort study in Japan

PURPOSE

To clarify the usefulness of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for low rectal cancer, we investigated the current status of CRT in Japan and its short- and long-term outcomes versus surgery alone for low rectal cancer in a large multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2011, data from 1608 patients with clinical Stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma were collected from 69 specialized centers. Of these 1608 patients, 923 were diagnosed with clinical stage III low rectal cancer, 838 were enrolled in this study, divided into the surgery-alone group (n = 649) and preoperative CRT group (n = 189), and analyzed.

RESULTS

The following parameters were significantly lower in the CRT versus surgery-alone group: blood loss (210 vs. 431.5 mL), postoperative complications (27.5% vs 39.0%), and the incidence of anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs. 8.8%). The 3-year overall survival, relapse-free and local recurrence-free survival rates did not between the two groups to a statistically significant extent (91.2% vs. 87.4%, 68.8% vs. 66.4%, and 88.2% vs. 88.4%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study revealed the current status of CRT for low rectal cancer in Japan. The results showed that CRT could be safely performed for advanced low rectal cancer in comparison to surgery alone.

Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy on Locally Advanced Rectal Mucinous Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Aims. To compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of rectal mucinous adenocarcinomas treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus surgery alone. Methods. A total of 167 locally advanced rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery alone between 2008 and 2014 were matched using propensity score; the surgical and oncological outcomes were compared. Results. Ninety-six patients were matched. Postoperative morbidity was similar between groups. Sphincter preservation rate was higher in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (79.2% versus 60.4%, P = 0.045), especially for tumors ≥ 3 cm but ≤5 cm from the anal verge (75.0% versus 44.0%, P = 0.036). With a median follow-up of 54.8 months, the 5-year overall survival rate (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus surgery alone: 79.6% versus 67.1%; P = 0.599) and disease-free survival rate (75.6% versus 64.2%; P = 0.888) were similar. The 5-year local recurrence rate was lower in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (7.7% versus 26.0%, P = 0.036), while no difference was observed in distant metastasis. A poor response to chemoradiation was associated with higher local recurrence (P = 0.037). Conclusions. Compared with surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was found to increase the sphincter preservation rate and reduce local recurrence, thus being beneficial for locally advanced rectal mucinous adenocarcinoma patients.

Radiotherapy for Colorectal Cancer: Current Standards and Future Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Multimodal treatment approaches are indispensable for patients with advanced-stage colorectal cancer. Radiotherapy has been established as essential part of perioperative concepts and was introduced as an option to face challenges such as local relapse or oligometastases.

METHODS

A literature review was performed to summarize evidence and current standards of radiotherapeutic concepts in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

For stage II/III rectal cancer, neoadjuvant radiotherapy is superior to adjuvant treatment. Two preoperative regimens have been established and are commonly used with different objectives: short-course radiotherapy (SC-RT) and long-course chemoradiotherapy (LC-CRT). Both reduce the risk of local relapse. Additionally, LC-CRT aims at downsizing the tumor to potentially reduce radicalness of surgery. There is increasing evidence that not all stage II/III rectal cancer patients need neoadjuvant irradiation but also that in some cases surgery might be omitted. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of the liver shows high rates of local control in oligometastatic patients. Intraoperative and particle radiotherapy extend the spectrum of treatment options for locally recurrent patients.

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapeutic concepts are crucial for the primary management of locally advanced colorectal cancer and can essentially contribute to treatment approaches in locally recurrent, oligometastatic or palliative patients.

Techniques and Outcome of Surgery for Locally Advanced and Local Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Locally advanced primary rectal cancer is variably defined, but generally refers to T3 and T4 tumours. Radical surgery is the mainstay of treatment for these tumours but there is a high-risk for local recurrence. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2011) guidelines recommend that patients with these tumours be considered for preoperative chemoradiotherapy and this is the starting point for any discussion, as it is standard care. However, there are many refinements of this pathway and these are the subject of this overview. In surgical terms, there are two broad settings: (i) patients with tumours contained within the mesorectal envelope, or in the lower rectum, limited to invading the sphincter muscles (namely some T2 and most T3 tumours); and (ii) patients with tumours directly invading or adherent to pelvic organs or structures, mainly T4 tumours - here referred to as primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision (PRC-bTME). Major surgical resection using the principles of TME is the mainstay of treatment for the former. Where anal sphincter sacrifice is indicated for low rectal cancers, variations of abdominoperineal resection - referred to as tailored excision - including the extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE), are required. There is debate whether or not plastic reconstruction or mesh repair is required after these surgical procedures. To achieve cure in PRC-bTME tumours, most patients require extended multivisceral exenterative surgery, carried out within specialist multidisciplinary centres. The surgical principles governing the treatment of recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) parallel those for PRC-bTME, but typically only half of these patients are suitable for this type of major surgery. Peri-operative morbidity and mortality are considerable after surgery for PRC-bTME and RRC, but unacceptable levels of variation in clinical practice and outcome exist globally. To address this, there are now major efforts to standardise terminology and classifications, to allow appropriate comparisons in future studies.

Comparative Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Treatment Prior to Total Mesorectal Excision and Total Mesorectal Excision Alone in Selected Stage II/III Low and Mid Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines advocate that all rectal cancer patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stages II and III disease should be subjected to neoadjuvant therapy. However, improvements in surgical technique have resulted in single-digit local recurrence rates with surgery only.

METHODS

Operative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes of patients with and without neoadjuvant therapy were compared between January 2002 and December 2013. For this purpose, all patients resected with low anterior rectal resection (LAR) and total mesorectal excision (TME) who had or had not been irradiated were identified from the authors' prospectively maintained database. Patients who were excluded were those with high rectal cancer or AJCC stage IV disease; in the surgery-only group, patients with AJCC stage I disease or with pT4Nx rectal cancer; and in the irradiated patients, patients with ypT4Nx or cT4Nx rectal cancer.

RESULTS

Overall, 454 consecutive patients were included. A total of 342 (75 %) patients were irradiated and 112 (25 %) were not irradiated. Median follow-up for all patients was 48 months. Among patients with and without irradiation, pathological circumferential resection margin positivity rates (2.9 vs. 1.8 %, p = 0.5) were not different. At 5 years, in irradiated patients compared with surgery-only patients, the incidence of local recurrence was decreased (4.5 vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.5); however, systemic recurrences occurred more frequently (10 vs. 17.8 %, p = 0.2). Irradiation did not affect overall or disease-free survival (neoadjuvant treatment vs. surgery-only: 84.9 vs. 88.2 %, p = 0.9; 76 vs. 79.1 %, p = 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study adds to the growing evidence that suggests a selective rather than generalized indication for neoadjuvant treatment in stages II and III rectal cancer.

Multivisceral Resection for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Prognostic Factors Influencing Outcome

AIMS

To assess outcome in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing multivisceral resection.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 30 consecutive patients (mean age 67.8 years) with primary locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing en bloc multivisceral resection of the organs involved with curative intent between 1998 and 2010. Overall survival, local and distal recurrence, and disease-free survival were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk factors for clinical outcome were obtained using a Cox multivariate model.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications occurred in 76.7% of patients and the in-hospital mortality rate was 10%. The median follow-up was 28.8 months. A total of 19 patients died at follow-up. Of the 11 patients who were alive, 7 were free of disease. In the multivariate analysis, lymph node involvement, stage II, and lymph vascular invasion were significantly associated with survival, and stage III showed a strong trend towards significance. Suture dehiscence (peritonitis and intra-abdominal abscess) showed a significant trend towards a higher local recurrence. Lymph vascular invasion was associated with a higher distant recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Lymph node involvement was associated with worse survival, whereas stage II and absence of lymph vascular invasion were associated with a better survival. Lymph vascular invasion was associated with a higher distant recurrence.

S-1-Based versus capecitabine-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer: a matched-pair analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to compare the efficacy and safety of S-1-based and capecitabine-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy regimens in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer through a retrospective matched-pair analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between Jan 2010 and Mar 2014, 24 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who received preoperative radiotherapy concurrently with S-1 were individually matched with 24 contemporary patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who received preoperative radiotherapy concurrently with capecitabine according to clinical stage (as determined by pelvic magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography) and age (within five years). All these patients performed mesorectal excision 4-8 weeks after the completion of chemoradiotherapy.

RESULTS

The tumor volume reduction rates were 55.9±15.1% in the S-1 group and 53.8±16.0% in the capecitabine group (p = 0.619). The overall downstaging, including both T downstaging and N downstaging, occurred in 83.3% of the S-1 group and 70.8% of the capecitabine group (p = 0.508). The significant tumor regression, including regression grade I and II, occurred in 33.3% of S-1 patients and 25.0% of capecitabine patients (p = 0.754). In the two groups, Grade 4 adverse events were not observed and Grade 3 consisted of only two cases of diarrhea, and no patient suffered hematologic adverse event of Grade 2 or higher. However, the incidence of diarrhea (62.5% vs 33.3%, p = 0.014) and hand-foot syndrome (29.2% vs 0%, p = 0.016) were higher in capecitabine group. Other adverse events did not differ significantly between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The two preoperative chemoradiotherapy regimens were effective and safe for patients of locally advanced rectal cancer, but regimen with S-1 exhibited a lower incidence of adverse events.

[Radiotherapy-associated morbidity and mortality in rectal surgery]

The treatment of rectal cancer has evolved significantly in recent decades. Both modern radiotherapy treatment concepts and surgical techniques have been able to improve oncological as well as functional outcomes for rectal cancer patients. Large-scale, multicenter, randomized trials have been able to demonstrate the benefits of neoadjuvant treatment over adjuvant radiotherapy. In addition, local tumor control is improved by neoadjuvant irradiation. Conversely, patients receiving a total mesorectal excision showed no survival advantage following irradiation vs. only surgically resected patients. In addition, radiation therapy is associated with a certain morbidity and mortality. This paper summarizes the available evidence regarding postoperative morbidity, mortality, and long-term chronic effects of neoadjuvant radiotherapy.

Intensified neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer enhances surgical complications

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy has proven superior to adjuvant treatment in reducing the rate of local recurrence without impairing cancer related survival or the incidence of distant metastases. The present study aimed at addressing the effects of an intensified protocol of neoadjuvant treatment on the development of postoperative complications.

METHODS

A total of 387 patients underwent oncological resection for rectal cancer in our institution between January 2000 and December 2009. 106 patients received an intensified radiochemotherapy. Perioperative morbidity and mortality were analyzed retrospectively with special attention on complication rates after intensified radio-chemotherapy. Therefore, for each patient subjected to neoadjuvant treatment a patient without neoadjuvant treatment was matched in the following order for tumor height, discontinuous resection/exstirpation, T-category of the TNM-system, dividing stoma and UICC stage.

RESULTS

Of all patients operated for rectal cancer, 27.4% received an intensified neoadjuvant treatment. Tumor location in the matched patients were in the lower third (55.2%), middle third (41.0%) and upper third (3.8%) of the rectum. Postoperatively, surgical morbidity was higher after intensified neoadjuvant treatment. In the subgroup with low anterior resection (LAR) the anastomosis leakage rate was higher (26.6% vs. 9.7%) and in the subgroup of patients with rectal exstirpations the perineal wound infection rate was increased (42.2% vs. 18.8%) after intensified radiochemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In rectal cancer the decision for an intensified neoadjuvant treatment comes along with an increase of anastomotic leakage and perineal wound infection. Quality of life is often reduced considerably and has to be balanced against the potential benefit of intensifying neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy.

Results of extralevator abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer including quality of life and long-term wound complications

PURPOSE

Extralevator abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer has been adopted by centers to improve oncological outcome. The present study aimed to investigate oncological results, wound complications, and quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Patients who underwent extralevator APR for rectal cancer between 2007 and 2011 were identified retrospectively. QoL status was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-CR30 and CR29 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Thirty laparoscopic (n = 7) or open (n = 23) extralevator APRs were performed in 17 male and 13 female patients. The mortality was zero; circumferential margin involvement occurred in two cases (6.7 %); and there was no bowel perforation. No local recurrence was noted after a median follow-up of 28.3 months; however, six patients died, and eight developed distant metastases. Perineal wound complications were found in 46.6 % of patients, and all were managed conservatively. Fifty percent of the patients reported persistent perineal pain at the follow-up exam. QoL was assessed 7 to 46 months after surgery, and the global health status (70.6) was comparable to the EORTC reference group and published conventional APR series. The QLQ-CR29 module revealed high mean symptom scores for urinary frequency (48.1), incontinence (30.5), and impotence (79.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Extralevator APR can control local recurrence but not distant metastases of low rectal cancer. The extended perineal resection appears not to decrease general QoL, but it results in a high rate of perineal wound complications. Genitourinary functions are often impaired, even in the long term, and further improvements to the technique must seek to reduce genitourinary harm.

Pre-operative chemoradiation for non-metastatic locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This review sets out to assess the efficacy of pre-operative chemoradiation when compared to radiotherapy alone before surgery in the treatment of advanced non metastatic rectal surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of pre-operative chemoradiation (CRT) compared with radiation (RT) alone, in locally advanced rectal cancer with respect to overall survival, local recurrence and 30 day mortality, sphincter preservation and toxicity of treatment (both acute and late).

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2011, we searched clinical trial registers, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, EMBASE and MEDLINE and reviewed reference lists. Further hand searches were conducted of relevant journal proceedings. No language constraints were applied.The following search terms were used: colorectal, rectal, rectum, cancer, carcinoma, tumour, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, chemoradiation, 5-Fluorouracil, 5-FU, neo-adjuvant, preoperative, surgery, anterior resection, abdominoperineal resection, total mesorectal excision.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Male and female patients aged over 18 years undergoing preoperative chemoradiation or radiotherapy followed by surgery for locally advanced non-metastatic rectal cancer. There was no upper age limit for participants. Locally advanced non-metastatic cancer was defined as stage 3 rectal tumours. These are tumours of any T stage with nodal involvement, without evidence of distant metastases.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Primary outcome parameters included overall survival and local recurrence rate. Secondary outcome parameters included 30 day mortality, sphincter preservation, pathological response of tumour, acute and late toxicity of treatment. The outcome parameters were summarized using the odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

There were 6 randomised controlled trials eligible for inclusion. A reduction in local recurrence was seen in the CRT group in comparison to the RT group (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.75, P<0.0001). The results for overall survival were (OR=1.01 95%CI 0.85-1.20, P=0.88).The 30 day mortality was the same for both groups, CRT vs RT (OR 1.73, 95% CI 0.88-3.38). Sphincter preservation (stoma rate) was also similar for the two interventions (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85-1.21, P=0.64). An increase in acute grade 3/4 treatment related toxicity was seen in the CRT group versus the RT group (OR 3.96, 95% CI 3.03, 5.17, P<0.00001), although this result did display heterogeneity P=0.0005. Late toxicity events were similar between the two groups (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.50, 1.54, P=0.65).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RT was compared to the more intensive CRT in the treatment of T3-4, node positive (locally advanced) rectal cancer. While there was no difference in overall survival between RT and CRT, CRT was associated with less local recurrence.

Phase I/II trial evaluating carbon ion radiotherapy for the treatment of recurrent rectal cancer: the PANDORA-01 trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment standard for patients with rectal cancer depends on the initial staging and includes surgical resection, radiotherapy as well as chemotherapy. For stage II and III tumors, radiochemotherapy should be performed in addition to surgery, preferentially as preoperative radiochemotherapy or as short-course hypofractionated radiation. Advances in surgical approaches, especially the establishment of the total mesorectal excision (TME) in combination with sophisticated radiation and chemotherapy have reduced local recurrence rates to only few percent. However, due to the high incidence of rectal cancer, still a high absolute number of patients present with recurrent rectal carcinomas, and effective treatment is therefore needed.Carbon ions offer physical and biological advantages. Due to their inverted dose profile and the high local dose deposition within the Bragg peak precise dose application and sparing of normal tissue is possible. Moreover, in comparison to photons, carbon ions offer an increase relative biological effectiveness (RBE), which can be calculated between 2 and 5 depending on the cell line as well as the endpoint analyzed.Japanese data on the treatment of patients with recurrent rectal cancer previously not treated with radiation therapy have shown local control rates of carbon ion treatment superior to those of surgery. Therefore, this treatment concept should also be evaluated for recurrences after radiotherapy, when dose application using conventional photons is limited. Moreover, these patients are likely to benefit from the enhanced biological efficacy of carbon ions.

METHODS AND DESIGN

In the current Phase I/II-PANDORA-01-Study the recommended dose of carbon ion radiotherapy for recurrent rectal cancer will be determined in the Phase I part, and feasibilty and progression-free survival will be assessed in the Phase II part of the study.Within the Phase I part, increasing doses from 12 × 3 Gy E to 18 × 3 Gy E will be applied.The primary endpoint in the Phase I part is toxicity, the primary endpoint in the Phase II part is progression-free survival.

DISCUSSION

With conventional photon irradiation treatment of recurrent rectal cancer is limited, and the clinical effect is only moderate. With carbon ions, an improved outcome can be expected due to the physical and biological characteristics of the carbon ion beam. However, the optimal dose applicable in this clincial situation as re-irradiation still has to be determined. This, as well as efficacy, is to be evaluated in the present Phase I/II trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01528683.

[Protective stoma after deep anterior rectal resection: pro]

There is still controversy about the necessity of a diverting stoma after deep anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Recent results of randomized controlled trials and from systematic reviews have improved the currently available data. A significant benefit was shown for patients with diverting stoma in terms of clinically relevant anastomotic leakage and re-operation rates. The influence on mortality is not as clear. However, analysis of the data of 19 prospective studies within a systematic review including more than 9,000 patients, revealed a significant benefit for stoma creation. Furthermore, the rate of patients with stoma 5 years after primary resection was lower in the group of patients with diverting stoma. The purpose of this manuscript is to show the necessity of a diverting stoma based on the currently available data.

[Rectal cancer. How much radiotherapy do surgery patients need?]

With the introduction of total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer treatment, local recurrence rates could be reduced below 10%. Previously such results could be achieved only in combination with multimodal therapy. Therefore the role of multimodal therapy had to be redefined. Randomized controlled trials have shown that the local recurrence rate can be reduced with no effect on overall survival and that neoadjuvant radiotherapy is superior to adjuvant radiotherapy. Controversy exists however about the best way of application, as either short-course radiotherapy (5x5 Gy) or combined radiochemotherapy, but not about its necessity, especially considering recent reports about late side effects of radiotherapy. It was the aim of this paper to explore the literature for the amount of radiotherapy surgical patients for rectal cancer really need. Interestingly, those with high rectal tumors do not benefit from radiotherapy. Further randomized trials are however required to address the need of radiotherapy in UICC tumor stages II or III with negative circumferential margin.

Perioperative blood transfusions for the recurrence of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The improvement of renal allograft survival by pre-transplantation transfusions alerted the medical community to the potential detrimental effect of transfusions in patients being treated for cancer.

OBJECTIVES

The present meta-analysis aims to evaluate the role of perioperative blood transfusions (PBT) on colorectal cancer recurrence. This is accomplished by validating the results of a previously published meta-analysis (Amato 1998); and by updating it to December 2004.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Published papers were retrieved using Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, controlled trials web-based registries, or the CCG Trial Database. The search strategy used was: {colon OR rectal OR colorectal} WITH {cancer OR tumor OR neoplasm} AND transfusion. The tendency not to publish negative trials was balanced by inspecting the proceedings of international congresses.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Patients undergoing curative resection of colorectal cancer (classified either as Dukes stages A-C, Astler-Coller stages A-C2, or TNM stages T1-3a/N0-1/M0) were included if they had received any amount of blood products within one month of surgery. Excluded were patients with distant metastases at surgery, and studies with short follow-up or with no data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A specific form was developed for data collection. Data extraction was cross-checked, using the most recent publication in case of repetitive ones. Papers' quality was ranked using the method by Evans and Pollock. Odds ratios (OR, with 95% confidence intervals) were computed for each study, and pooled estimates were generated by RevMan (version 4.2). When available, data were stratified for risk factors of cancer recurrence.

MAIN RESULTS

The findings of the 1998 meta-analysis were confirmed, with small variations in some estimates. Updating it through December 2004 led to the identification of 237 references. Two-hundred and one of them were excluded because they analyzed survival (n=22), were repetitive (n=26), letters/reviews (n=66) or had no data (n=87). Thirty-six studies on 12,127 patients were included: 23 showed a detrimental effect of PBT; 22 used also multivariable analyses, and 14 found PBT to be an independent prognostic factor. Pooled estimates of PBT effect on colorectal cancer recurrence yielded overall OR of 1.42 (95% CI, 1.20 to 1.67) against transfused patients in randomized controlled studies. Stratified meta-analyses confirmed these findings, also when stratifying patients by site and stage of disease. The PBT effect was observed regardless of timing, type, and in a dose-related fashion, although heterogeneity was detected. Data on surgical techniques was not available for further analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated meta-analysis confirms the previous findings. All analyses support the hypothesis that PBT have a detrimental effect on the recurrence of curable colorectal cancers. However, since heterogeneity was detected and conclusions on the effect of surgical technique could not be drawn, a causal relationship cannot still be claimed. Carefully restricted indications for PBT seems necessary.