Intraoperative Electron Beam Radiation Therapy (IOERT) Versus High-Dose-Rate Intraoperative Brachytherapy (HDR-IORT) in Patients With an R1 Resection for Locally Advanced or Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Treatment of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Review

ABSTRACT

Up to 10% of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer will experience locoregional recurrence. In the setting of prior surgery and often radiation and chemotherapy, these represent uniquely challenging cases. When feasible, surgical resection offers the best chance for oncologic control yet risks significant morbidity. Studies have consistently indicated that a negative surgical resection margin is the strongest predictor of oncologic outcomes. Chemoradiation is often recommended to increase the chance of an R0 resection, and in cases of close/positive margins, intraoperative radiation/brachytherapy can be utilized. In patients who are not surgical candidates, radiation can provide symptomatic relief. Ongoing phase III trials are aiming to address questions regarding the role of reirradiation and induction multiagent chemotherapy regimens in this population.

Dutch national guidelines for locally recurrent rectal cancer

Due to improvements in treatment for primary rectal cancer, the incidence of LRRC has decreased. However, 6-12% of patients will still develop a local recurrence. Treatment of patients with LRRC can be challenging, because of complex and heterogeneous disease presentation and scarce - often low-grade - data steering clinical decisions. Previous consensus guidelines have provided some direction regarding diagnosis and treatment, but no comprehensive guidelines encompassing all aspects of the clinical management of patients with LRRC are available to date. The treatment of LRRC requires a multidisciplinary approach and overarching expertise in all domains. This broad expertise is often limited to specific expert centres, with dedicated multidisciplinary teams treating LRRC. A comprehensive, narrative literature review was performed and used to develop the Dutch National Guideline for management of LRRC, in an attempt to guide decision making for clinicians, regarding the complete clinical pathway from diagnosis to surgery.

Omentoplasty in Patients Undergoing Abdominoperineal Resection After Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced and Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Comparative Single-Institution Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Omentoplasty is a commonly performed procedure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, but its effectiveness to reduce pelviperineal complications is not firmly established.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the impact of omentoplasty on postoperative outcomes after long-course (chemo) radiotherapy and abdominoperineal resection in patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Single center.

PATIENTS

All patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation in a tertiary referral center between 2008 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to analyze the association between omentoplasty and pelviperineal complications, duration of nasogastric tube drainage, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 305 patients were analyzed, of whom 245 underwent omentoplasty (80%). Pelviperineal complications occurred in 151 patients (50%) overall, in 125 patients (51%) with omentoplasty, and in 26 patients (43%) without omentoplasty. Independent predictors of pelviperineal complications in multivariable analyses were smoking (OR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.46-4.94) and high BMI (OR 1.68; 95% CI, 1.00-2.83), but not omentoplasty (OR 1.36; 95% CI, 0.77-2.40). The mean duration of nasogastric tube drainage was longer after omentoplasty (6 vs 4 d) with a significant association in multivariable analysis (β coefficient 1.97; 95% CI, 0.35-3.59). Patients undergoing omentoplasty had a significantly longer hospital stay (14 vs 10 d), and omentoplasty remained associated with a prolonged hospital stay after adjusting for confounding (β coefficient 3.05; 95% CI, 0.05-5.74).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Omentoplasty was not associated with a reduced risk of the occurrence of short-term pelviperineal complications after abdominoperineal resection in patients undergoing long-course (chemo)radiotherapy. Furthermore, in patients undergoing omentoplasty, prolonged duration of nasogastric tube drainage and hospital stay was observed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C124 .

OMENTOPLASTIA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A RESECCIN ABDOMINOPERINEAL DESPUS DE QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA DE CURSO LARGO PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y LOCALMENTE RECURRENTE ESTUDIO DE COHORTE COMPARATIVO DE UNA SOLA INSTITUCIN

ANTECEDENTES:La omentoplastía es un procedimiento que se realiza comúnmente después de la resección abdominoperineal por cáncer de recto, pero su efectividad para reducir las complicaciones pelvicoperineales no está firmemente establecida.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el impacto de la omentoplastía en las complicaciones pelvicoperineales a corto plazo y los resultados postoperatorios después quimioradioterapia de curso largo y resección abdominoperineal en pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y localmente recurrente.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Centro único.PACIENTES:Se revisaron retrospectivamente todos los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y localmente recurrente sometidos a resección abdominoperineal después de quimioradiación neoadyuvante en un centro de referencia de tercer nivel entre 2008 y 2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se realizaron análisis de regresión lineal y logística multivariable para examinar la asociación entre la omentoplastía y las complicaciones pelvicoperineales (p. ej., problemas de heridas perineales y abscesos pélvicos), la duración del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica y la duración de la estancia hospitalaria.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron un total de 305 pacientes de los cuales 245 fueron sometidos a omentoplastía (80%). Las complicaciones pelvicoperineales ocurrieron en 151 pacientes (50%) en general, y en 125 (51%) y 26 (43%) de los pacientes con o sin omentoplastía, respectivamente. Los predictores independientes de complicaciones pelvicoperineales en análisis multivariable fueron el tabaquismo (OR 2.68, IC del 95% 1.46 a 4.94) y un IMC alto (OR 1.68, IC del 95% 1.00 a 2.83), pero no la omentoplastía (OR 1.36, IC del 95% 0.77 a 2.40) . La duración media del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica fue mayor después de la omentoplastía (6 frente a 4 días) con una asociación significativa en el análisis multivariable (coeficiente β 1.97, IC del 95%: 0.35-3.59). Los pacientes que se sometieron a una omentoplastía tuvieron una estancia hospitalaria significativamente más larga (14 frente a 10 días), y la omentoplastía permaneció asociada con una estancia hospitalaria prolongada después de ajustar por factores de confusión (coeficiente β 3.05, IC del 95%: 0.05-5.74).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La omentoplastía no se asoció con un riesgo reducido de aparición de complicaciones pelvicoperineales a corto plazo después de la resección abdominoperineal en pacientes sometidos a quimioradioterapia de larga duración. Adicionalmente, en los pacientes sometidos a omentoplastía se observó una duración prolongada del drenaje por sonda nasogástrica y la estancia hospitalaria. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C124 . (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Toward a Second Chance at Cure? A Population-Based, Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In current practice, rates of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) are low due to the use of the total mesorectal excision (TME) in combination with various neoadjuvant treatment strategies. However, the literature on LRRC mainly consists of single- and multicenter retrospective cohort studies, which are prone to selection bias. The aim of this study is to provide a nationwide, population-based overview of LRRC after TME in the Netherlands.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In total, 1431 patients with nonmetastasized primary rectal cancer diagnosed in the first six months of 2015 and treated with TME were included from the nationwide, population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Data on disease recurrence were collected for patients diagnosed in these 6 months only. Competing risk cumulative incidence, competing risk regression, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess incidence, risk factors, treatment, and overall survival (OS) of LRRC.

RESULTS

Three-year cumulative incidence of LRRC was 6.4%; synchronous distant metastases (LRRC-M1) were present in 44.9% of patients with LRRC. Distal localization, R1-2 margin, (y)pT3-4, and (y)pN1-2 were associated with an increased LRRC rate. No differences in LRRC treatment and OS were found between patients who had been treated with or without prior n(C)RT. Curative-intent treatment was given to 42.9% of patients with LRRC, and 3-year OS thereafter was 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

Nationwide LRRC incidence was low. A high proportion of patients with LRRC underwent curative-intent treatment, and OS of this group was high in comparison with previous studies. Additionally, n(C)RT for primary rectal cancer was not associated with differences in treatment and OS of LRRC.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy with Intra-Operative Radiotherapy for Patients with Locally Advanced or Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer and Peritoneal Metastases

Purpose: To assess the safety and long-term outcome of a multimodality treatment consisting of radical surgery, intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT), and cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) or locally recurrent rectal carcinoma (LRRC) and peritoneal metastases (PM). Methods: The present study was a single-center cohort study, including all consecutive patients undergoing this treatment in a tertiary referral center for LARC, LRRC, and PM. Postoperative complications, intensive care stay (ICU stay), and re-admission rates were assessed as well as disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 14 LARC and 16 LRRC patients with PM were included in the study. The median ICU stay was 1 day, and 57% of patients developed a severe postoperative complication. No 90-day mortality was observed. Median DFS was 10.0 months (Interquartile Range 7.1-38.7), and median OS was 31.0 months (Interquartile Range 15.9-144.3). Conclusions: As postoperative complications and survival were in line with treatments that are accepted for LARC or LRRC and PM as separate procedures, we conclude that combined treatment with IORT and CRS-HIPEC should be considered as a treatment option for selected patients with LARC or LRRC and peritoneal metastases in tertiary referral centers.

Minimum standards of pelvic exenterative practice: PelvEx Collaborative guideline

This document outlines the important aspects of caring for patients who have been diagnosed with advanced pelvic cancer. It is primarily aimed at those who are establishing a service that adequately caters to this patient group. The relevant literature has been summarized and an attempt made to simplify the approach to management of these complex cases.

Long-Term Outcome of Centrally Located Hepatocellular Carcinomas Treated by Radical Resection Combined With Intraoperative Electron Radiotherapy (IOERT)

Purpose

To explore the feasibility and safety of centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma (CL-HCC) treated by narrow-margin resection combined with intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT).

Methods and Materials

From November 2009 to November 2016, 37 consecutive patients were treated with IOERT as adjuvant treatment during narrow-margin resection for CL-HCC. Long-term outcomes, adverse events for surgery, and acute and chronic toxicities were analyzed.

Results

The median follow-up was 57.82 months (range, 3.75-111.41 months). A total dose of 15 Gy (range 12 to 17Gy) (prescribed at the 90% isodose) was delivered with a 0.9cm (range 0.8-1.2 cm) median treatment depth targeting the narrow-margin. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 91.39%, 88.34% and 88.34%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year DFS rates were 80.81%, 68.59% and 54.17%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, none of the treatment characteristics were predictive of overall survival. Fifteen (40.5%) patients suffered from a recurrence event. No patient had marginal recurrence. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year intrahepatic recurrence rates were 19.75%, 25.92% and 39.58%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year extrahepatic recurrence rates were 2.7%, 5.95% and 9.87%, respectively. There was no 30-day surgical-related death. Three patients had grade 4, and 28 patients had grade 3 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, and seven patients had grade 4, and 30 patients had grade 3 aspartate transaminase (AST) levels. All of them returned to normal within four months. There was no acute radiation-induced liver injury during follow-up. There were no acute or chronic toxicities associated with IOERT.

Conclusion

IOERT for narrow-margin CL-HCC may achieve good long-term survival outcomes, without significantly increasing acute and chronic toxicities. An IOERT dose of 15Gy may be the safest and most feasible. IOERT might be considered as an adjuvant therapy for CL-HCC patients with a narrow-margin.