Preoperative radiotherapy and local excision of rectal cancer with immediate radical re-operation for poor responders: a prospective multicentre study

Nonoperative management and local excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer

Locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer represents a significant clinical challenge, and currently, the standard treatment is based on neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) followed by radical surgical resection with total mesorectal excision (TME). In the last 30 years, its management has undergone significant changes due to the improvement of complementary radio- and chemotherapy treatments, the improvement of minimally invasive surgical approaches and the diffusion of organ-sparing approaches, such as nonoperative management, commonly called "watch and wait" (NOM) and local excision (LE), in highly selected patients who achieve a major or complete response to neoadjuvant CRT. This review aimed to critically examine the efficacy and oncological safety of NOM and LE compared to those of standard TME in rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant CRT. Both the pros and cons of these approaches were strictly analyzed, providing a comprehensive and critical overview of these novel management strategies for rectal cancer.

Advancing Personalized Medicine in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Rectal cancer presents a significant burden globally, often requiring multimodal therapy for locally advanced cases. Long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) and short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) followed by surgery have been conventional neoadjuvant approaches. Recent trials favor LCRT due to improved local control. However, distant tumor recurrence remains a concern, prompting the exploration of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) as a comprehensive treatment strategy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show promise, particularly in mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors, potentially revolutionizing neoadjuvant regimens. Nonoperative management (NOM) represents a viable alternative post-neoadjuvant therapy for selected patients achieving complete clinical response (cCR). Additionally, monitoring minimal residual disease (MRD) using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) emerges as a non-invasive method for the assessment of treatment response. This review synthesizes current evidence on TNT, ICIs, NOM, and ctDNA, elucidating their implications for rectal cancer management and highlighting avenues for future research and clinical application.

Early Rectal Cancer and Local Excision: A Narrative Review

A rise in the incidence of early rectal cancer consequent to bowel-screening programs around the world and an increase in the incidence in young adults has led to a growing interest in organ-sparing treatment options. The rectum, being the most distal portion of the large intestine, is a fertile ground for local excision techniques performed with endoscopic or surgical techniques. Moreover, the advancement in endoscopic optical evaluation and the better definition of imaging techniques allow for a more precise local staging of early rectal cancer. Although the local treatment of early rectal cancer seems promising, in clinical practice, a significant number of patients who could benefit from local excision techniques undergo total mesorectal excision (TME) as the first approach. All relevant prospective clinical trials were identified through a computer-assisted search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases until January 2024. This review is dedicated to endoscopic and surgical local excision in the treatment of early rectal cancer and highlights its possible role in current and future clinical practice, taking into account surgical completion techniques and chemoradiotherapy.

Completion total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and local excision for rectal cancer

AIM

Local excision (LE) in selected cases after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in clinically complete or major responders has been recently reported as an alternative to standard radical resection. Completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is generally performed when high-risk pathological features are found in LE surgical specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of residual tumour and lymph node metastases after cTME in patients previously treated by RCT + LE. The secondary aims were to quantify the rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality and to evaluate the long-term oncological outcome of this group of patients.

METHODS

All patients treated from 2007 to 2020 by LE for locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinically complete or major response to RCT who had a subsequent cTME for high-risk pathological factors (ypT >1 and/or TRG >2 and/or positive margins) were included in this multicentre retrospective study. Pathological data, postoperative short-term morbidity (classified according to Clavien-Dindo) and mortality and oncological long-term outcome after cTME were recorded in a database. Statistical analysis was performed using Wizard for iOS version 1.9.31.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The rate of R0 resection was 95.7%, and a sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 37 patients (78.7%), with a protective stoma rate of 78.4%. In 28 cases (59.6%), it was possible to perform a minimally invasive approach. A residual tumour (pT and/or pN) on cTME specimens was found in 21 cases (44.7%). The rate of lymph node metastases was 12.8%. The overall short-term (within 30 days) postoperative morbidity was 34%, but grade >2 postoperative complications occurred in only nine patients (19.1%), with a reoperation rate of 6.4%. No short-term postoperative deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 57 months (range: 21-174), the long-term stoma-free rate was 70.2%, and the actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were 86.7%, 88.9% and 95.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

When patients exhibit high-risk pathological factors after RCT + LE, cTME should be suggested due to the high risk of residual tumour or lymph node involvement (44.7%). The results after cTME in terms of the rate of R0 resection, sphincter-saving procedure, postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term oncological outcome seem to be acceptable and do not represent a contraindication to use LE as a first-step treatment in patients with major or complete clinical response after RCT.

Organ Preservation in MSS Rectal Cancer

Rectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease with complex genetic and molecular subtypes. Emerging progress of neoadjuvant therapy has led to increased pathological and clinical complete response (cCR) rates for microsatellite stable (MSS) rectal cancer, which responds poorly to immune checkpoint inhibitor alone. As a result, organ preservation of MSS rectal cancer as an alternative to radical surgery has gradually become a feasible option. For patients with cCR or near-cCR after neoadjuvant treatment, organ preservation can be implemented safely with less morbidity. Patient selection can be done either before the neoadjuvant treatment for higher probability or after with careful assessment for a favorable outcome. Those patients who achieved a good clinical response are managed with nonoperative management, organ preservation surgery, or radiation therapy alone followed by strict surveillance. The oncological outcomes of patients with careful selection and organ preservation seem to be noninferior compared with those of radical surgery, with lower postoperative morbidity. However, more studies should be done to seek better regression of tumor and maximize the possibility of organ preservation in MSS rectal cancer.

Limits of Clinical Restaging in Detecting Responders After Neoadjuvant Therapies for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Accurate clinical restaging is required to select patients who respond to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer and who may benefit from an organ preservation strategy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to review our experience with the clinical restaging of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy to assess its accuracy in detecting major and pathological complete response to treatment.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at 2 high-volume Italian centers for Colorectal Surgery.

PATIENTS

Data were included from all consecutive patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer from January 2012 to July 2020. Criteria to define clinical response were no palpable mass, a superficial ulcer <2 cm (major response), or no mucosal abnormality (complete response) at endoscopy and no metastatic nodes at MRI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values of clinical restaging in detecting pathological complete response (ypT0) or major pathological response (ypT0-1) after neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 333 patients were included; 81 (24.3%) had a complete response whereas 115 (34.5%) had a pathological major response. Accuracy for clinical complete response was 80.8% and for major clinical response was 72.9%. Sensitivity was low for both clinical complete response (37.5%) in detecting ypT0 and clinical major response (59.3%) in detecting ypT0-1. Positive predictive value was 68.2% for ypT0 and 60.4% for ypT0-1.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitation of the study its retrospective nature.

CONCLUSION

Accuracy of actual clinical criteria to define pathological complete response or pathological major response is poor. Failure to achieve good sensitivity and precision is a major limiting factor in the clinical setting. Current clinical assessments need to be revised to account for indications for rectal preservation after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C63 .

LMITES DE LA REESTADIFICACIN CLNICA EN LA DETECCIN DE RESPONDEDORES DESPUS DE TERAPIAS NEOADYUVANTES PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO

ANTECEDENTES:Se requiere una nueva reestadificación clínica precisa para seleccionar pacientes que respondan a la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y que puedan beneficiarse de una estrategia de preservación de órganos.OBJETIVO:El propósito de este estudio fue revisar nuestra experiencia con la reestadificación clínica del cáncer de recto después de la terapia neoadyuvante para evaluar su precisión en la detección de una respuesta patológica importante y completa al tratamiento.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en dos centros italianos de alto volumen para cirugía colorrectal.PACIENTES:Incluimos datos de todos los pacientes consecutivos que se sometieron a terapia neoadyuvante y cirugía por cáncer de recto localmente avanzado desde enero de 2012 hasta julio de 2020. Los criterios para definir la respuesta clínica fueron ausencia de masa palpable, úlcera superficial <2 cm (respuesta mayor) o ausencia de anomalías en la mucosa. (respuesta completa) en la endoscopia, y sin ganglios metastásicos en la resonancia magnética.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Exploramos la sensibilidad, la especificidad, los valores predictivos positivos y negativos de la reestadificación clínica para detectar una respuesta patológica completa (ypT0) o mayor (ypT0-1) después de la terapia neoadyuvante.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 333 pacientes; 81 (24,3%) tuvieron una respuesta completa mientras que 115 (34,5%) tuvieron una respuesta patológica mayor. La precisión de la respuesta clínica completa y la respuesta clínica importante fue del 80,8 % y el 72,9 %, respectivamente. La sensibilidad fue baja tanto para la respuesta clínica completa (37,5 %) en la detección de ypT0 como para la respuesta clínica mayor (59,3 %) en la detección de ypT0-1. El valor predictivo positivo fue del 68,2 % para ypT0 y del 60,4 % para ypT0-1.LIMITACIONES:Nuestro estudio tiene como principal limitación su carácter retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓNES:La precisión de los criterios clínicos reales para definir una respuesta patológica completa o mayor es pobre. El hecho de no lograr una buena sensibilidad y precisión es un factor limitante importante en el entorno clínico. La indicación para la preservación rectal después de la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante necesita una mejora de la evaluación clínica actual. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C63 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Towards Response ADAptive Radiotherapy for organ preservation for intermediate-risk rectal cancer (preRADAR): protocol of a phase I dose-escalation trial

INTRODUCTION

Organ preservation is associated with superior functional outcome and quality of life (QoL) compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer. Only 10% of patients are eligible for organ preservation following short-course radiotherapy (SCRT, 25 Gy in five fractions) and a prolonged interval (4-8 weeks) to response evaluation. The organ preservation rate could potentially be increased by dose-escalated radiotherapy. Online adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) is anticipated to reduce radiation-induced toxicity and enable radiotherapy dose escalation. This trial aims to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of dose-escalated SCRT using online adaptive MRgRT.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The preRADAR is a multicentre phase I trial with a 6+3 dose-escalation design. Patients with intermediate-risk rectal cancer (cT3c-d(MRF-)N1M0 or cT1-3(MRF-)N1M0) interested in organ preservation are eligible. Patients are treated with a radiotherapy boost of 2×5 Gy (level 0), 3×5 Gy (level 1), 4×5 Gy (level 2) or 5×5 Gy (level 3) on the gross tumour volume in the week following standard SCRT using online adaptive MRgRT. The trial starts on dose level 1. The primary endpoint is the MTD based on the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) per dose level. DLT is a composite of maximum one in nine severe radiation-induced toxicities and maximum one in three severe postoperative complications, in patients treated with TME or local excision within 26 weeks following start of treatment. Secondary endpoints include the organ preservation rate, non-DLT, oncological outcomes, patient-reported QoL and functional outcomes up to 2 years following start of treatment. Imaging and laboratory biomarkers are explored for early response prediction.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the University Medical Centre Utrecht. The primary and secondary trial results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

WHO International Clinical Trials Registry (NL8997; https://trialsearch.who.int).

Transanal Local Excision of Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation: Is There a Place for It or Should Be Avoided at All Costs?

Tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) with tumor downsizing and downstaging has significantly impacted the number of patients considered to be appropriate candidates for transanal local excision (TLE). Some patients may harbor small residual lesions, restricted to the bowel wall. These patients, who exhibit major response ("near-complete") by digital rectal examination, endoscopic assessment, and radiological assessment may be considered for this approach. Although TLE is associated with minimal postoperative morbidity, a few clinical consequences and oncological outcomes must be evaluated in advance and with caution. In the setting of nCRT, a higher risk for clinically relevant wound dehiscences leading to a considerable risk for readmission for pain management has been observed. Worse anorectal function (still better than after total mesorectal excision [TME]), worsening in the quality of TME specimen, and higher rates of abdominal resections (in cases requiring completion TME) have been reported. The exuberant scar observed in the area of TLE also represents a challenging finding during follow-up of these patients. Local excision should be probably restricted for patients with primary tumors located at or below the level of the anorectal ring (magnetic resonance defined). These patients are otherwise candidates for abdominal perineal resections or ultra-low anterior resections with coloanal anastomosis frequently requiring definitive stomas or considerably poor anorectal function.

Rectal cancer: Maximizing local control and minimizing toxicity

Adoption of multimodality treatment approach for rectal cancer has resulted in significant improvements in oncologic outcomes. The roles of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery in rectal cancer treatment are continuously evolving with the goal of achieving the best possible oncologic and functional outcome while minimizing treatment toxicity. The aim of this review is to summarize the most recent trials focusing on organ-sparing treatment strategies and the optimal selection of patients for neoadjuvant radiation therapy.

Rectal Sparing Approach After Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: The Preliminary Results of the ReSARCh Trial

BACKGROUND

Rectum-preservation for locally advanced rectal cancer has been proposed as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with major (mCR) or complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy. The purpose of this study was to report on the short-term outcomes of ReSARCh (Rectal Sparing Approach after preoperative Radio- and/or Chemotherapy) trial, which is a prospective, multicenter, observational trial that investigated the role of transanal local excision (LE) and watch-and-wait (WW) as integrated approaches after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with mid-low rectal cancer who achieved mCR or cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and were fit for major surgery were enrolled. Clinical response was evaluated at 8 and 12 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. Treatment approach, incidence, and reasons for subsequent TME were recorded.

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2019, 160 patients were enrolled; mCR or cCR at 12 weeks was achieved in 64 and 96 of patients, respectively. Overall, 98 patients were managed with LE and 62 with WW. In the LE group, Clavien-Dindo 3+ complications occurred in three patients. The rate of cCR increased from 8- to 12-week restaging. Thirty-three (94.3%) of 35 patients with cCR had ypT0-1 tumor. At a median 24 months follow-up, a tumor regrowth was found in 15 (24.2%) patients undergoing WW.

CONCLUSIONS

LE for patients achieving cCR or mCR is safe. A 12-week interval from chemoradiotherapy completion to LE is correlated with an increased cCR rate. The risk of ypT > is reduced when LE is performed after cCR.

[Rectal Cancer: Organ preservation and neoadjuvant treatment escalation]

Standard treatment consisting of chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery with total mesorectal excision, results in good oncologic local control but high morbidity and poor functional results. Since chemoradiotherapy results in 15% pathological complete response, even reaching up to 30% in case of association with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radical surgery has been recently debated for good responders. Therefore, a de-escalation strategy, by omitting radical surgery in good responders, has recently been developed with two different options: a watch and wait strategy, requiring an accurate clinical and radiological definition of complete response and a local excision strategy including patients with sub-complete response. Ongoing trials focus on response optimization by chemotherapy intensification or radiotherapy dose escalation. However, many questions are still to be answered regarding definition of complete response, follow-up strategy, morbidity of salvage surgery in case of recurrence as well as long-term oncological and functionnal results.

Preservation of the rectum is possible in early rectal cancer with neoadjuvant radiotherapy, delay and local excision-a 12-year single-centre experience of the evolution of early rectal cancer treatment

AIM

Treatment of early rectal cancer (ERC) is undergoing a revolution towards rectum preservation. Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy alongside local excision (LE) means that organ preservation is a real possibility for most patients and a viable alternative for frailer patients. This study presents our 12-year experience as a specialist regional ERC unit, evolving towards organ preservation.

METHOD

Data were collected prospectively between 2006 and 2018 for all patients referred to the regional ERC multidisciplinary team with suspected or confirmed ERC. Patients considered suitable for LE, or those declining radical surgery, were offered LE or neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy (SCRT), delay and LE with subsequent rescue surgery or contact brachytherapy for unfavourable histopathology.

RESULTS

In all, 102 patients underwent LE. Ten patients were excluded (N = 92). 45 patients underwent LE directly and 47 patients received SCRT and LE. After SCRT and LE, a pathological complete response was achieved in 44.7%. This approach also resulted in a lower rate of lymphovascular invasion (22.2% vs. 6.4%), fewer distant recurrences (4.4% vs. 0%) and a better disease-specific mortality (11.1% vs. 0%) (P < 0.05). Although statistically insignificant, fewer patients required rescue surgery after SCRT (15.6% vs. 4.3%).

CONCLUSION

Organ preservation with a good oncological outcome is better achieved by neoadjuvant radiotherapy, delay and LE. To achieve this, careful patient selection, thorough preoperative investigation, experienced surgical technique and a deep appreciation of tumour biology managed via a dedicated ERC network is paramount.

Rectal cancer: Watch-and-wait and continuing the rectal-preserving strategy with local excision for incomplete response or limited regrowth

BACKGROUND

Deferral of conventional surgery for rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy is gaining increasing interest, particularly for patients who are too frail to undergo major surgery but also those who wish to avoid the adverse effects of major surgery. We elected to undertake a pragmatic approach to include all comers in a cohort with the aim of reflecting the clinical outcomes for patients on a deferral from conventional rectal surgery pathway, treated with neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation (CRT) with or without selective local excision (LE) offered to those who failed to demonstrate a complete clinical response (cCR).

METHODS

Rectal cancer patients treated with neo-adjuvant CRT were stratified to a group of complete responders to CRT on a "watch and wait" (WW) pathway and a group who were treated with an additional local excision for persistent tumour.

RESULTS

Regrowth was noted in 26% (11/42) in the WW group after 2 years surveillance, disease free survival was 94.5% (80-99%) at 1 year and 74.9% (44-76.4%) at 3 years. Recurrence was noted in 45% (10/22) in the CRT + LE group, disease free survival at 1 and 3 years was 74% (53.4-88.1) and 66.2% (45.6-82.4) respectively.

CONCLUSION

A WW strategy for cCR is a viable pathway in the non-operative management of rectal cancer. We found the use of CRT + LE is a useful option for those who hope to avoid surgery but caution should be exercised due to substantially higher risk of recurrence.

Long-Term Outcomes of Local Excision Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Background

Local excision might represent an alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve a major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Methods

Between August 2005 and July 2011, 63 patients with mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma who had a major/complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were enrolled in a multicenter prospective phase 2 trial and underwent transanal full thickness local excision. The main endpoint of this study was to evaluate the 5- and 10-year overall, relapse-free, local, and distant relapse-free survival, which were calculated by applying the Kaplan–Meier method. The rate of patients with rectum preserved and without stoma were also calculated.

Results

Of 63 patients, 38 (60%) were male and 25 (40%) were female, with a median (range) age of 64 (25–82) years. At baseline, the following clinical stages were found: cT2, n = 21 (33.3%); cT3, n = 42 (66.6%), 39 (61.9%) patients were cN+. At a median (range) follow-up of 108 (32–166) months, the estimated cumulative 5- and 10-year overall survival, relapse-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and distant recurrence-free survival were 87% (95% CI 76–93) and 79% (95% CI 66–87), 89% (95% CI 78–94) and 82% (95% CI 66–91), both 91% (95% CI 81–96), and 90% (95% CI 80–95) and 86% (95% CI 73–93), respectively. Overall, 49 (77.8%) patients had their rectum preserved, and 54 (84.1%) were stoma-free.

Conclusion

In highly selected patients, the local excision approach after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is associated with excellent long-term outcomes, high rates of rectum preservation and absence of permanent stoma.

BILATERAL AVASCULAR NECROSIS OF SACRAL LATERAL MASSES AFTER A COMPLETE RADIOLOGICAL RESPONSE OF LOCALLY ADVANCED RECTAL CANCER TREATED WITH NEOADJUVANT CHEMORADIATION THERAPY. CASE REPORT

We present a rare case report of a bilateral avascular necrosis of lateral sacral masses in a patient who developed a sustainable complete clinical and radiological response after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. It is shown that despite the standardized and precise planning and fractioning for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, the biological effects of ionizing radiation on critical organs can be va- ried both in time of occurrence and in structure. Evaluating the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, one should take into account the possibility of the development of even very rare effects of ionizing radiation on criti- cal organs and include their early detection in the diagnostic algorithm.

Radiomics performs comparable to morphologic assessment by expert radiologists for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on baseline staging MRI in rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the performance of advanced radiomics analysis to morphological assessment by expert radiologists to predict a good or complete response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer using baseline staging MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the primary staging MRIs [prior to chemoradiotherapy (CRT)] of 133 rectal cancer patients from 2 centers. First, two expert radiologists subjectively estimated the likelihood of achieving a "complete response" (ypT0) and "good response" (TRG 1-2), using a 5-point score (based on TN-stage, MRF/EMVI-status, size/signal/shape). Next, tumor volumes were segmented on high b value DWI (semi-automated, corrected by 2 non-expert and 2-expert readers, resulting in 5 segmentations), copied to the remaining sequences after which a total of 2505 radiomic features were extracted from T2W, low and high b value DWI and ADC. Stability of features for noise due to inter-reader and inter-scanner and protocol variations was assessed using intraclass correlation (ICC) and the Kruskal-Wallis test. Using data from center 1 (n = 86; training set), top 9 features were selected using minimum Redundancy Maximum Relevance and combined in a logistic regression model. Finally, diagnostic performance of the fitted models was assessed on data from center 2 (n = 47; validation set) and compared to the performance of the radiologists.

RESULTS

The Radiomic models resulted in AUCs of 0.69-0.79 (with similar results for the segmentations performed by expert/non-expert readers) to predict response, results similar to the morphologic prediction by the expert radiologists (AUC 0.67-0.83). Radiomics using semi-automatically generated segmentations (without manual input) did not result in significant predictive performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiomics could predict response to therapy with comparable diagnostic performance as expert radiologists, regardless of whether image segmentation was performed by non-expert or expert readers, indicating that expert input is not required in order for the radiomics workflow to produce significant predictive performance.

Local excision in rectal cancer patients with major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy: a case-matched study

PURPOSE

To assess the long-term oncological outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by local or total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant therapy from 2005 to 2017 were evaluated. Those with major or complete clinical response underwent a full-thickness local excision. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate overall, disease-free, and local recurrence-free survival of patients who underwent local excision (LE group) and were compared with a matched cohort of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME group).

RESULTS

Among 252 patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, 51 (20.2%) underwent a local excision. At a median follow-up of 61 months, patients who underwent local excision were stoma-free in 88.2% of cases and with rectum preserved in 78.5% of cases, respectively. The estimated 5-year local, disease-free, and overall survival was 91.8% vs 97.6% (95% CI: 79.5-96.8 vs 84.6-99.6), 86.7% vs 86.4% (95% CI: 72.5-93.9 vs 70.1-94.1), and 85% vs 90% (95% CI: 69.0-93.0% vs 75.3-96.2), in the study and matched control group, respectively. None of the differences was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

One-fifth of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer are manageable with a rectum-sparing approach after neoadjuvant therapy. With this strategy, about 80% patients will have their rectum preserved and 90% will be without stoma at long term.

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in T2-T3 rectal cancer: current status and critical appraisal

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is an organ-preserving procedure which aims at reducing morbidity and functional disorders associated with total mesorectal excision (TME) in selected patients. Although TME after chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for locally advanced mid and low rectal cancer, in the last years multicenter research trials have offered encouraging oncologic results which have allowed to preserve the rectum in patients with a pathologic complete response after chemoradiotherapy. A review of the available literature on this topic was conducted to define the state of the art of this conservative approach and to focus on the most controversial aspects concerning local excision performed after chemoradiotherapy, in particular tumor scatter and lymph node status, completion and salvage surgery, morbidity and quality of life. The analysis of these topics should be considered, in trial setting or in current practice, for their clinical implications. Oncologic outcomes of recent trials are encouraging for part of the patients presenting T2 rectal cancer; however, TME still remains the standard treatment in clinical practice. In such cases, local excision should include a surgical safety margin of at least 1 cm from the resection margin to achieve a true negative margin from residual tumor cells. The selection of the patients should be carefully performed and their consensus extremely detailed because TME is necessary in about 30% of cases. Failing that, morbidity and quality of life are negatively affected. However, about half of these patients refuse radical surgery (45%), thus undergoing only palliative care.

Individual participant data pooled-analysis of risk factors for recurrence after neoadjuvant radiotherapy and transanal local excision of rectal cancer: the PARTTLE study

BACKGROUND

An organ-preserving strategy may be a valid alternative in the treatment of selected patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Preoperative assessment of the risk for tumor recurrence is a key component of surgical planning. The aim of the present study was to increase the current knowledge on the risk factors for tumor recurrence.

METHODS

The present study included individual participant data of published studies on rectal cancer surgery. The literature was reviewed according to according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data checklist (PRISMA-IPD) guidelines. Series of patients, whose data were collected prospectively, having neoadjuvant radiotherapy followed by transanal local excision for rectal cancer were reviewed. Three independent series of univariate/multivariate binary logistic regression models were estimated for the risk of local, systemic and overall recurrence, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 15 studies, and 7 centers provided individual data on 517 patients. The multivariate analysis showed higher local and overall recurrences for ypT3 stage (OR 4.79; 95% CI 2.25-10.16 and OR 6.43 95% CI 3.33-12.42), tumor size after radiotherapy > 10 mm (OR 5.86 95% CI 2.33-14.74 and OR 3.14 95% CI 1.68-5.87), and lack of combined chemotherapy (OR 3.68 95% CI 1.78-7.62 and OR 2.09 95% CI 1.10-3.97), while ypT3 was the only factor correlated with systemic recurrence (OR 5.93). The analysis of survival curves shows that the overall survival is associated with ypT and not with cT.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision should be offered with caution after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to selected patients with rectal cancers, who achieved a good response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Oncologic Outcomes of Organ Preserving Approaches in Patients With Rectal Cancer Treated With Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy

Purpose

We evaluated the oncologic outcomes of organ-preserving strategies in patients with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT).

Methods

Between January 2008 and January 2013, 74 patients who underwent wait-and-watch (WW) (n = 42) and local excision (LE) (n = 32) were enrolled. Organ-preserving strategies were determined based on a combination of magnetic resonance imaging, sigmoidoscopy, and physical examination 4–6 weeks after completion of PCRT. The rectum sparing rate, 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

Results

The rectum was more frequently spared in the LE (100% vs. 87.5%, P = 0.018) at last follow-up. Recurrence occurred in 9 (28.1%) WW and 7 (16.7%) LE (P = 0.169). In the WW, 7 patients had only luminal regrowth and 2 had combined lung metastasis. In the LE, 2 (4.8%) had local recurrence only, 4 patients had distant metastasis, and 1 patient had local and distant metastasis. Among 13 patients who indicated salvage surgery (WW, n = 7; LE, n = 11), all in the WW received but all of LE refused salvage surgery (P = 0.048). The 5-year OS and 5-year RFS in overall patients was 92.7% and 76.9%, respectively, and were not different between WW and LE (P = 0.725, P = 0.129).

Conclusion

WW and LE were comparable in terms of 5-year OS and RFS. In the LE group, salvage treatment was performed much less among indicated patients. Therefore, methods to improve the oncologic outcomes of patients indicated for salvage treatment should be considered before local excision.

Watchful Waiting after Radiochemotherapy in Rectal Cancer: When Is It Feasible?

A "watch and wait" strategy in rectal cancer is increasingly considered in patients who achieve an excellent response to radiotherapy. While a growing number of studies have shown the feasibility of this strategy in selected patients, the optimal therapeutic regimen to maximize response rates still needs to be established. Furthermore, accurate response prediction and the management of minor residual findings after radiotherapy remain a matter of debate. Finally, concerns regarding the long-term oncological safety of the "watch and wait" approach have been expressed. Therefore, the present review aims to address the open questions in the context of a "watch and wait" strategy and focuses on the diagnosis of a clinical complete response and the ideal management thereafter.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by transanal local excision for T2 rectal cancer confers equivalent survival benefit as traditional transabdominal resection

BACKGROUND

Despite clinical guidelines classifying T2 rectal cancer as a contraindication for transanal local excision attributable to unacceptably high rates of local recurrence, it is a practice that persists clinically. Recent clinical trials have suggested that transanal local excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation is an acceptable alternative in select patients.

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgical intervention. Patients were stratified by treatment with transabdominal resection or transanal local excision, both with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Propensity matching was performed, and, using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models, survival was compared between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 12,021 patients met inclusion criteria, including 1,761 and 6,629 patients who underwent transabdominal resection with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively, and 695 and 2,936 patients who underwent local transanal excision with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively. In unadjusted analysis, patients undergoing induction therapy followed by transabdominal resection or local excision had equivalent survival. Similarly, on multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression after propensity matching, local excision was not an independent predictor of patient mortality compared with transabdominal resection (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.16).

CONCLUSION

Local transanal excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation may provide comparable survival benefit to transabdominal resection for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal cancer. Therefore, patients who refuse or are poor candidates for transabdominal resection should be considered for neoadjuvant therapy followed by transanal local excision.

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.

Optimal management of localized rectal cancer in older patients

In advising the optimal management for older patients, health care professionals try to balance the risks from frailty, vulnerability, and comorbidity against the patient's ultimate prognosis, potential functional outcomes and quality of life (QOL). At the same time it is important to involve the patient and incorporate their preferences. But how can we present and balance the potential downside of radical radiotherapy and risks of unsalvageable recurrence against the potential risks of postoperative morbidity and mortality associated with radical surgery? There are currently no nationally approved and evidence-based guidelines available to ensure consistency in discussions with older adults or frail and vulnerable patients. In this overview we hope to provide an insightful discussion of the relevant issues and options currently available.

Can clinicopathological parameters predict for lymph node metastases in ypT0-2 rectal carcinoma? Results of the CAO/ARO/AIO-94 and CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

The advent of less radical surgical approaches has generated concern about leaving locoregional lymph node metastases (LNM) unresected that could lead to adverse outcome. We examined the prognostic role of clinicopathological factors for ypN-positivity in patients with ypT0-2 rectal carcinoma treated within the CAO/ARO/AIO-94 and CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomized phase 3 trials.

METHODS

The correlation of clinicopathological factors with ypN-status (ypN0 vs ypN1/2) was examined in n = 776 patients with ypT0-2 rectal carcinoma after preoperative CRT and total mesorectal excision surgery using Pearson's Chi-squared test for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis' test for continuous variables. Multivariable analysis was performed using binary logistic regression to identify independent prognosticators for ypN-positivity.

RESULTS

Residual LNM (ypN+) were found in 6%, 20.8% and 21.4% of patients with ypT0, ypT1 and ypT2 carcinomas, respectively. Independent prognosticators for LNM were advanced ypT category (p = 0.002) and lymphatic invasion (p = 0.020). In a separate multivariable analysis performed upon exclusion of ypT-category due to multicollinearity with residual tumor diameter (RTD), lymphatic invasion (p = 0.015) and RTD ≥10 mm (p = 0.005) demonstrated strong correlation with LNM.

CONCLUSION

Advanced ypT-stage, lymphatic invasion and RTD ≥10 mm were prognostic factors for LNM in patients ypT0-2 rectal carcinoma treated with CRT and surgery within both phase 3 trials. The high incidence of LNM in the ypT1-2 group needs to be taken into consideration in the context of oncological safety and indicate that LE should be advocated with great caution in this patient subgroup. The prognostic pathological factor identified here could help guide decision of LE vs TME after standard CRT.

Neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent treatment in rectal cancer: balance between oncological and functional outcomes

Current practice of neoadjuvant therapy and total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer bears the weakness in systemic disease control and long-term functional outcomes. With increasing concerns of the balance between cure and quality of life, new strategies are developed to better oncological outcomes at least cost of function damage. Attractive options to adjust neoadjuvant modality include escalation of radiotherapy, intensification of chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy with consolidation or full-course chemotherapy. Subsequently, organ-preserving strategies have gained the popularity. Surgical or nonsurgical approaches that spare the rectum are used as possible alternatives for radical surgery, though high-quality TME remains the last resort to offer reliable local disease control. This review discusses new strategies of neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent management, with a specific focus on the balance between oncological and functional outcomes.

Preoperative radiotherapy and local excision of rectal cancer: Long-term results of a randomised study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

It is uncertain whether local control is acceptable after preoperative radiotherapy and local excision (LE). An optimal preoperative dose/fractionation schedule has not yet been established.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a phase III study, patients with cT1-2N0M0 or borderline cT2/T3N0M0 < 4 cm rectal adenocarcinomas were randomised to receive either 5 × 5 Gy plus 1 × 4 Gy boost or chemoradiation: 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions plus 3 × 1.8 Gy boost and 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin bolus. LE was performed 6-8 weeks later. Patients with ypT0-1R0 disease were observed. Completion total mesorectal excision (CTME) was recommended for poor responders, i.e. ypT1R1/ypT2-3.

RESULTS

Of 61 randomised patients, 10 were excluded leaving 51 for analysis; 29 in the short-course group and 22 in the chemoradiation group. YpT0-1R0 was observed in 66% of patients in the short-course group and in 86% in the chemoradiation group, p = 0.11. CTME was performed only in 46% of patients with ypT1R1/ypT2-3. The median follow-up was 8.7 years. Local recurrence incidences and overall survival at 10 years were respectively for the short-course group vs. the chemoradiation group 35% vs. 5%, p = 0.036 and 47% vs. 86%, p = 0.009. In total, local recurrence at 10 years was 79% for ypT1R1/T2-3 without CTME.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial suggests that in the LE setting, both local recurrence and survival are worse after short-course radiotherapy than after chemoradiation. Because of the risk of bias, a confirmatory study is desirable. Lack of CTME is associated with an unacceptably high local recurrence rate.

The predictive and prognostic potential of plasma telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) RNA in rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by surgery is the standard care for locally advanced rectal cancer, but tumour response to CRT and disease outcome are variable. The current study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of plasma telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) levels in predicting tumour response and clinical outcome.

METHODS

176 rectal cancer patients were included. Plasma samples were collected at baseline (before CRT=T0), 2 weeks after CRT was initiated (T1), post-CRT and before surgery (T2), and 4-8 months after surgery (T3) time points. Plasma TERT mRNA levels and total cell-free RNA were determined using real-time PCR.

RESULTS

Plasma levels of TERT were significantly lower at T2 (P<0.0001) in responders than in non-responders. Post-CRT TERT levels and the differences between pre- and post-CRT TERT levels independently predicted tumour response, and the prediction model had an area under curve of 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.87). Multiple analysis demonstrated that patients with detectable TERT levels at T2 and T3 time points had a risk of disease progression 2.13 (95% CI 1.10-4.11)-fold and 4.55 (95% CI 1.48-13.95)-fold higher, respectively, than those with undetectable plasma TERT levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma TERT levels are independent markers of tumour response and are prognostic of disease progression in rectal cancer patients who undergo neoadjuvant therapy.

Total Mesorectal Excision Versus Local Excision After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Rectal Cancer With Lymph Node Metastasis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

PURPOSE

To determine whether local excision (LE) outcomes were comparable to total mesorectal excision (TME) outcomes in node-positive (cN+) rectal cancer patients who were good responders.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This retrospective study included clinical T2-3 and cN+ low rectal cancer patient who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) followed by TME or LE. Clinical stage T1 or T4 tumors, upper-to-middle rectal tumors (>7 cm from anal verge), and synchronous distant metastases were excluded. Lymph nodes ≥5 mm in size were defined as tumor-positive, and patients with metastatic lymph nodes >20 mm in size were excluded. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy comprised radiation (50-50.4 Gy/25-28 fractions over 5 weeks) with 2 cycles of 5-fluorouracil or oral capecitabine. Propensity scores were computed from tumor and patient variables and used for 1-to-1 matched analysis. Local recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared between the 2 matched groups.

RESULTS

Between January 2007 and December 2013, 563 and 55 patients underwent TME and LE, respectively. The median follow-up period was 54 months. In propensity score-matched analysis, 48 patients were included in each group. No statistical differences were observed in 3-year local recurrence-free survival (97.9% vs 97.9%, P = .994), 3-year disease-free survival (91.5% vs 91.4%, P = .968), or 3-year OS (93.7% vs 97.9%, P = .809) between the TME and LE groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical N+ rectal cancer patients, oncologic outcomes of PCRT followed by LE were comparable to those of TME; this finding might be applicable only to those patients with good response in the primary tumor and small lymph node metastases.

Can we Save the rectum by watchful waiting or TransAnal microsurgery following (chemo) Radiotherapy versus Total mesorectal excision for early REctal Cancer (STAR-TREC study)?: protocol for a multicentre, randomised feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the highly effective standard treatment for rectal cancer but is associated with significant morbidity and may be overtreatment for low-risk cancers. This study is designed to determine the feasibility of international recruitment in a study comparing organ-saving approaches versus standard TME surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

STAR-TREC trial is a multicentre international randomised, three-arm parallel, phase II feasibility study in patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the rectum. The trial is coordinated from Birmingham, UK with national hubs in Radboudumc (the Netherlands) and Odense University Hospital Svendborg UMC (Denmark). Patients with rectal cancer, staged by CT and MRI as ≤cT3b (up to 5 mm of extramural spread) N0 M0 can be included. Patients will be randomised to either standard TME surgery (control), organ-saving treatment using long-course concurrent chemoradiation or organ-saving treatment using short-course radiotherapy. For patients treated with an organ-saving strategy, clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy determines the next treatment step. An active surveillance regime will be performed in the case of a complete clinical regression. In the case of incomplete clinical regression, patients will proceed to local excision using an optimised platform such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or other transanal techniques (eg, transanal endoscopic operation or transanal minimally invasive surgery). The primary endpoint of this phase II study is to demonstrate sufficient international recruitment in order to sustain a phase III study incorporating pelvic failure as the primary endpoint. Success in phase II is defined as randomisation of at least four cases per month internationally in year 1, rising to at least six cases per month internationally during year 2.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The medical ethical committees of all the participating countries have approved the study protocol. Results of the primary and secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN14240288, 20 October 2016. NCT02945566; Pre-results, October 2016.

Complete response after chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: what is the reasonable approach?

With the increasing use of preoperative treatment rather than upfront surgery, it has become evident that the response of rectal carcinoma to standard chemoradiotherapy (CRT) shows a great variety that includes histopathologiocally confirmed complete tumor regression in 10–30% of cases. Adaptive strategies to avoid radical surgery, either by local excision or non-operative management, have been proposed in these highly responsive tumors. A growing number of prospective clinical trials and experiences from large databases, such as the European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA) watch-and-wait database, or the recent Oncological Outcome after Clinical Complete Response in Patients with Rectal Cancer (OnCoRe) project, will provide more information on its safety and efficacy, and help to select appropriate patients. Future studies will have to establish appropriate inclusion criteria and optimize CRT regimens in order to maximize the number of patients achieving complete response. Standardized re-staging procedures have to be investigated to improve the prediction of a sustained complete response, and long-term close follow-up with thorough documentation of failure patterns and salvage therapies will have to prove the oncological safety of this approach.

Predictive role of microRNA-related genetic polymorphisms in the pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients

In rectal cancer, a pathologic complete response (pCR) to pre-operative treatment is a favourable prognostic marker, but is reported in a minority of the patients. We aimed at identifying microRNA-related host genetic polymorphisms predictive of pCR.

A panel of 114 microRNA-related tagging polymorphisms was selected and analyzed on 265 locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. Patients were stratified in two subgroups according to the radiotherapy dose (50.4Gy for 202 patients, 55.0Gy for 78 patients). Interactions among genetic and clinical-pathological variants were investigated by recursive partitioning analysis.

Only polymorphisms with a consistent significant effect in the two subgroups of patients were selected as predictive markers of pCR. The results were validated by bootstrap analysis. SMAD3-rs744910, SMAD3-rs745103, and TRBP-rs6088619 were associated to an increased chance of pCR (p=0.0153, p=0.0471, p=0.0125). DROSHA-rs10719 and SMAD3-rs17228212 had an opposite detrimental effect on pathological tumour response (p=0.0274, p=0.0049). Recursive partitioning analysis highlighted that a longer interval time between the end of radiotherapy and surgery increases the chance of pCR in patients with a specific combination of SMAD3-rs744910 and TRBP-rs6088619 genotypes.

This study demonstrated that microRNA-related host genetic polymorphisms can predict pCR to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, and could be used to personalize the interval time between the end of radiotherapy and surgery.

Organ-Preserving Strategies for the Management of Near-Complete Responses in Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

In recent years, organ preservation has been considered a feasible alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, the degree of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is variable. A fraction of the patients who did not achieve a complete response had grossly visible tumors. These patients, with clearly incomplete clinical response, need a total mesorectal excision. In addition, some patients with a significant tumor response still have some abnormalities in the bowel wall, such as superficial ulceration or tissue nodularity, which, while not conclusive for the presence of a tumor, are indicative of the possibility of a residual tumor in the bowel wall or in mesorectal lymph nodes. The management of patients with a so-called near-complete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy is controversial. In this article, we will review the clinical and radiological criteria that define a clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy, possible treatment strategies, and follow-up protocols. We will also discuss patient and tumor characteristics that in our opinion can be useful in selecting the most appropriate treatment alternative. Although organ preservation and quality of life are important, the primary goal of treatment for these patients should be local tumor control and long-term survival.

Prediction of N0 Irradiated Rectal Cancer Comparing MRI Before and After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The prediction of lymph node status using MRI has an impact on the management of rectal cancer, both before and after preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to maximize the negative predictive value and sensitivity of mesorectal lymph node imaging after chemoradiotherapy because postchemoradiation node-negative patients may be treated with rectum-sparing approaches.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital.

PATIENTS

Sixty-four patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy and MRI for staging and the assessment of response were evaluated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The sums of the sizes of all mesorectal lymph nodes in each patient on both prechemoradiotherapy and postchemoradiotherapy imaging data sets were calculated to determine the lymph node global size reduction rates, taking these to be the outcomes of the histopathologic findings. Other included measures were interobserver agreement regarding the prediction of node status based on morphologic criteria and the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced images.

RESULTS

Using a cutoff value of a 70% lymph node global size reduction rate with only 15 node-positive patients on histopathology, the sensitivity in the prediction of nodal status and negative predictive value were 93% (95% CI, 70.2%-98.8%) and 97% (95% CI, 82.9%-99.8%) for observer 1 and 100% (95% CI, 79.6%-100%) and 100% (95% CI, 62.9%-100%) for observer 2. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the 2 observers were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.98; p < 0.0001) for observer 1 and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.50-0.79; p = 0.08) for observer 2. The efficacy of the morphologic criteria and contrast-enhanced images in predicting node status was limited after chemoradiotherapy.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its small sample size and retrospective nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing the lymph node global size reduction rate value reduces the risk of undetected nodal metastases and may be helpful in better identifying suitable candidates for the local excision of early stage rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A412.

Rectal sparing approach after preoperative radio- and/or chemotherapy (RESARCH) in patients with rectal cancer: a multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

Rectum-sparing approaches appear to be appropriate in rectal cancer patients with a major (mCR) or complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of rectum-sparing approaches at 2 years after the completion of neoadjuvant treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with rectal adenocarcinoma eligible to receive neoadjuvant therapy will be prospectively enrolled. Patients will be restaged 7-8 weeks after the completion of neoadjuvant therapy and those with mCR (defined as absence of mass, small mucosal irregularity no more than 2 cm in diameter at endoscopy and no metastatic nodes at MRI) or cCR will be enrolled in the trial. Patients with mCR will undergo local excision, while patients with cCR will either undergo local excision or watch and wait policy. The main end point of the study is to determine the percentage of rectum preservation at 2 years in the enrolled patients.

CONCLUSION

This protocol is the first prospective trial that investigates the role of both local excision and watch and wait approaches in patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02710812).

New Strategies in Rectal Cancer

In recent years, our understanding of rectal cancer has improved, including how locally advanced disease responds to chemotherapy and radiation. This has led to new innovations and advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, which includes organ-preserving strategies for responsive disease, and minimally invasive approaces for the performance of total mesorectal excision/protectomyh for persistently advanced disease. This article discusses new strategies for rectal cancer therapy, including Watch and Wait, local excision, minimally invasive proctectomy, and transanal total mesorectal excision particularly in the setting of preoperative multimodality treatment.

Magnetic resonance imaging following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer

AIM

Full-thickness local excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with rectal cancer and incomplete clinical response has been a treatment strategy for organ preservation. Follow-up of these patients is challenging since anatomic distortion and postoperative changes may be clinically indistinguishable from tumour recurrence. MRI may have a role in detecting recurrence. The aim of this study was to describe the MRI findings during follow-up in patients having local excision following CRT with and without local recurrence.

METHOD

The data were collected retrospectively from a single centre. Fifty-three patients with rectal cancer who had full-thickness local excision after neoadjuvant CRT and near-complete response were eligible for the study. Patients with local recurrence were treated by radical salvage surgery. The main outcome was local MRI assessment findings during follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (five who developed local recurrence and 10 with no evidence of local recurrence) had MR images available for review and were included in the study. High signal intensity and thickening of the rectal wall were present in all patients with recurrent disease within the rectal wall. Overall, 80% of the patients with recurrence showed diffusion restriction. MRI mesorectal fascia status and circumferential resection margin showed agreement in all cases. A low signal intensity scar was seen in all patients without recurrent disease.

CONCLUSION

MRI shows high signal intensity and thickening of the rectal wall in recurrent disease in comparison to a low signal intensity fibrotic scar in non-recurrent disease. These findings may be useful in surveillance of these patients.

Total Mesorectal Excision Versus Local Excision After Favorable Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in "Early" Clinical T3 Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare oncological outcomes of total mesorectal excision (TME) and local excision (LE) in patients with "early" clinical T3 rectal cancer who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

"Early" clinical T3 rectal cancer was radiologically defined as tumors with extramural extension of <5 mm without mesorectal fascia involvement and lateral lymph node metastasis. Patients with "early" clinical T3 rectal cancer who received PCRT followed by TME or LE between January 2007 and December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity scores were generated using patient and tumor characteristics, and a one-to-one case-matched analysis was conducted. Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the TME and LE groups.

RESULTS

Of the 406 enrolled patients, 351 received TME and 55 received LE. The median follow-up period was 45 months. Following propensity score matching, each group contained 55 patients. Among 103 patients evaluable for pathologic tumor response, 82 patients (79.6%) showed complete response or near-complete response. No significant differences were observed between the TME and LE groups in LRFS (3-year LRFS 98.1% vs 94.4%, P=.312), DFS (3-year DFS 92.1% vs 90.8%, P=.683), and OS (3-year OS 98.2% vs 100.0%, P=.895).

CONCLUSIONS

In "early" clinical T3 rectal cancer, PCRT followed by LE showed comparable oncologic outcomes to TME. Because most of the matched cohort consisted of good responders to PCRT, the present results should be applied to a limited population.

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) techniques encompass a variety of approaches, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery. These allow a surgeon to perform local excision of rectal lesions with minimal morbidity and the potential to spare the need for proctectomy. As understanding of the long-term outcomes from these procedures has evolved, so have the indications for TES. In this study, we review the development of TES, its early results, and the evolution of new surgical techniques. In addition, we evaluate the most recent research on indications and outcomes in rectal cancer.

Local Excision Techniques for Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: What Are We Doing?

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence shows that the majority of rectal cancers demonstrate occult tumor scatter after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy that can extend for several centimeters under adjacent normal-appearing mucosa beside the residual mucosal abnormality or scar.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to determine all of the published selection criteria and technical descriptions for local excision to date with regard to this phenomenon.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched using the following key words: rectal cancer, local excision, radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies that assessed local excision of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Duplicate series were excluded from final analysis.

INTERVENTION

All of the data points were tabulated and analyzed using Microsoft Excel.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Criteria for patient selection, surgical technique, clinical restaging, pathologic assessment, and indications for completion surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

After exclusions, data from 25 studies that in total evaluated local excision in 1001 patients were included. Compared with the single accepted technique of total mesorectal excision, described techniques for local excision after neoadjuvant therapy demonstrate significant variability in many critical technical issues, such as marking/tattooing original tumor margins before neoadjuvant therapy, using pretreatment tumor size/stage as exclusion criteria, and specifically stating lateral excision margins. Where detailed, the majority of local recurrences occurred in patients with clear pathological margins, yet significant variation existed for pathological assessment and reporting, with few studies detailing R status and some not reporting margin status at all. Significant variability also existed for adverse tumor features that mandated completion surgery, and, importantly, many series describe patients refusing completion surgery where indicated.

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to perform meta-analysis because studies lacked sufficient methodologic homogeneity to synthesize.

CONCLUSIONS

The observations from this study prompt additional study, standardization of technique, and cautious use of local excision of rectal cancer in the setting of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

A Retrospective Analysis on Two-week Short-course Pre-operative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients with Resectable Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

To validate that a two-week short-course pre-operative radiotherapy regimen is feasible, safe, and effective for the management of elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), we retrospectively analyzed 99 radiotherapy-naive patients ≥70 years of age with LARC. Patients received pelvic radiation therapy (3D-CRT 30Gy/10f/2w) followed by TME surgery; some patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was OS, while the secondary endpoints were DFS, safety and response rate. The median follow-up time was 5.1 years. The 5-year OS and DFS rates were 58.3% and 51.2%, respectively. The completion rate of radiotherapy (RT) was 99.0% (98 of 99). Grade 3 acute adverse events, which resulted from RT, occurred in only 1 patient (1.0%). In addition, no grade 4 acute adverse events induced by RT were observed. All 99 patients (100%) were able to undergo R0 surgical resection, and 68.6% of the patients received sphincter-sparing surgery. The rate of occurrence of clinically relevant post-operative complications was 12.1%. Three patients (3.0%) achieved pathologic complete responses, and forty-three patients (43.4%) achieved pathologic partial responses. The rates of T-downsizing and N-downstaging were 30.3% and 55.7%, respectively. Therefore, we believe that a two-week short-course pre-operative radiotherapy is feasible in elderly patients with resectable LARC.

Bowel function and quality of life after local excision or total mesorectal excision following chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Local excision for rectal cancer is expected to offer a better functional outcome than conventional surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare quality of life and bowel function in patients with rectal cancer who underwent either local excision or conventional surgery after chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicentre study. Patients who underwent local excision were compared with those who had mesorectal excision. Quality of life and bowel function were investigated using validated questionnaires (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29 and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument) at a median follow-up of 49 (range 13-95) months. Further analysis was undertaken of data from patients who underwent local excision alone compared with those requiring subsequent radical surgery. Statistical significance was set at P < 0·010.

RESULTS

The mean constipation score was significantly better in the local excision group than in the mesorectal excision group (3·8 (95 per cent c.i. 0·3 to 7·2) versus 19·8 (12·1 to 27·4); P < 0·001). Compared with patients who underwent mesorectal excision, those who had local excision had less sensation of incomplete emptying (mean score 3·7 (3·4 to 4·0) versus 2·8 (2·5 to 3·1); P < 0·001) and second bowel movements within 15 min (mean score 3·6 (3·3 to 3·9) versus 3·0 (2·7 to 3·3); P = 0·006). Patients who underwent local excision alone scored better than those who had mesorectal excision, particularly for bowel function, who, in turn, scored better than patients requiring subsequent radical surgery following local excision.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent local excision had a better quality of life and bowel function than those who underwent mesorectal excision.