Effective pelvic symptom control using initial chemoradiation without colostomy in metastatic rectal cancer

Palliative pelvic radiotherapy for symptomatic frail or metastatic patients with rectal adenocarcinoma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced rectal cancer can cause severe symptomatic pelvic morbidity such as pain, haemorrhage or bowel obstruction for frail or metastatic patients, which are often unfit to undergo surgery or intense systemic treatment. The most frequent radiation schedule is 25 Gy/ 5f but the optimal dose is yet to determine. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review on the efficacy and toxicity of the published radiation schedules of palliative rectal cancer.

METHODS

Systematic literature of the Medline, Embase and Cochrane library databases were performed throughout the year 2023. Published articles on palliative external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for locally advanced or metastatic rectal cancer reporting on symptom palliation, overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QOL) were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, five of them were prospective studies. There were large variations in radiation schedules, associated chemotherapy and palliative care. Pooled overall symptomatic response rate was 71 %, while response rates were respectively 90 %, 85 %, and 84 % for pain, bleeding, and pelvic symptoms. Acute toxicities were mostly mild genitourinary or gastrointestinal.

CONCLUSIONS

Short course palliative radiation for LARC for frail or metastatic patients is efficient for symptom palliation with few adverse effects. A short course EBRT with an integrated IMRT boost on the tumoral volume could be of interest.

Palliative short-course radiotherapy (RAPASH study) in patients with rectal cancer

Background

Palliative radiation therapy (RT) is used to treat symptomatic rectal cancer although clinical benefits and toxicities are poorly documented. There is no consensus about the optimal RT regimen and clinical practice undergoes significant changes. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of short-course (SC) RT in this setting of patients.

Materials and methods

Charts from patients with locally advanced disease not candidates for standard treatment or with symptomatic metastatic rectal cancer treated with SCRT (25 Gy/5 fractions in 5 consecutive days) were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical outcome measures were symptomatic response rate and toxicity.

Results

From January 2007 to December 2017, 59 patients (median age 80 years) received SCRT; 53 were evaluable. The median follow-up was 8 months (range, 1-70). Clinical response to RT for bleeding, pain and tenesmus was 100%, 95% and 89%, respectively. The compliance with the treatment was 100% and no patient experienced acute severe (≥ grade 3) toxicities. Median time to symptoms recurrence was 11 months (range 3-69). Globally, the median overall survival was 12 months.

Conclusions

SCRT is a safe and effective regimen in symptomatic rectal cancer and may be considered the regimen of choice for standard treatment in unfit patients.

Clinical Radiobiology for Radiation Oncology

This chapter is focused on radiobiological aspects at the molecular, cellular, and tissue level which are relevant for the clinical use of ionizing radiation (IR) in cancer therapy. For radiation oncology, it is critical to find a balance, i.e., the therapeutic window, between the probability of tumor control and the probability of side effects caused by radiation injury to the healthy tissues and organs. An overview is given about modern precision radiotherapy (RT) techniques, which allow optimal sparing of healthy tissues. Biological factors determining the width of the therapeutic window are explained. The role of the six typical radiobiological phenomena determining the response of both malignant and normal tissues in the clinic, the 6R’s, which are Reoxygenation, Redistribution, Repopulation, Repair, Radiosensitivity, and Reactivation of the immune system, is discussed. Information is provided on tumor characteristics, for example, tumor type, growth kinetics, hypoxia, aberrant molecular signaling pathways, cancer stem cells and their impact on the response to RT. The role of the tumor microenvironment and microbiota is described and the effects of radiation on the immune system including the abscopal effect phenomenon are outlined. A summary is given on tumor diagnosis, response prediction via biomarkers, genetics, and radiomics, and ways to selectively enhance the RT response in tumors. Furthermore, we describe acute and late normal tissue reactions following exposure to radiation: cellular aspects, tissue kinetics, latency periods, permanent or transient injury, and histopathology. Details are also given on the differential effect on tumor and late responding healthy tissues following fractionated and low dose rate irradiation as well as the effect of whole-body exposure.

Addition of chemoradiotherapy to palliative chemotherapy in de novo metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a real-world study

Background

To determine whether concurrent chemotherapy is necessary during locoregional radiotherapy (RT) after palliative chemotherapy (PCT) in patients with de novo metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (mNPC).

Methods

A total of 746 patients with mNPC from 2000 to 2017 at our hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 355 patients received PCT followed by RT. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), including locoregional progression-free survival (LRPFS) and distant progression-free survival (DPFS) were estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Cox proportional-hazards models, landmark analyses, propensity score matching, and subgroup analyses were used to address confounding.

Results

Of the patients included in our study, 192 received radiotherapy alone after PCT (PCT + RT), and 163 received concurrent chemoradiotherapy after PCT (PCT + CCRT). The prognosis of PCT + CCRT was significantly better than that of PCT + RT (5 year OS, 53.0 vs 36.2%; P = 0.004). After matching, the 5 year OS rates of the two groups were 55.7 and 39.0%, respectively (P = 0.034) and the median DPFS were 29.4 and 18.7 months, respectively (P = 0.052). Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that PCT + CCRT was an independent favorable prognostic factor (P = 0.009). In addition, conducting concurrent chemoradiotherapy after 4–6 cycles of PCT or conducting concurrent chemotherapy with single-agent platinum was associated with significant survival benefit in the matched cohort (5 year OS rate, 60.4 or 57.4%, respectively). The survival difference between groups remained significant when evaluating patients who survived for ≥ 1 year (P = 0.028).

Conclusions

The optimal treatment strategy of mNPC is the combination of PCT followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. More specifically, concurrent chemoradiotherapy with single-agent platinum after 4–6 cycles of PCT is suggested.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12935-022-02464-7.

Is There a Role for Perioperative Pelvic Radiotherapy in Surgically Resected Stage IV Rectal Cancer?: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether perioperative pelvic radiotherapy (RT) improves outcomes in stage IV rectal cancer patients treated with primary surgical resection and systemic chemotherapy and to identify predictive factors for selection of patients for these approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with stage IV rectal cancer, but without brain or bone metastases. After applying the exclusion criteria, a total of 26,132 patients were included in the analysis; propensity score matching was used to balance their individual characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 3283 (12.6%) patients received perioperative RT; the 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 43.6% in the surgery group and 50.5% in the surgery with RT group (P<0.001). The survival benefit of RT was maintained after propensity score matching and multivariate adjustment (hazard ratio: 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.81; P<0.001). Interaction testing of the prognostic variables showed a significant interaction between RT and the presence of lung metastasis (P<0.001): the benefit of RT was observed only in patients without lung metastases (3 y OS 52.1% vs. 44.1%, P<0.001), but it was observed regardless of liver metastases. In addition, we developed a web-based calculator (http://bit.do/mRC_surv) to provide individualized estimates of OS benefit based on the receipt of perioperative pelvic RT.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative pelvic RT significantly improved OS rates, especially in patients without lung metastases. We successfully developed a nomogram and web-based calculator that could predict survival benefit with the addition of RT for these patients.

Analysis of Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Metastatic Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Using a large national registry, we investigated patterns of care and overall survival (OS) for metastatic rectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy (RT), or with a multimodal approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with metastatic rectal cancer who did not undergo resection diagnosed from 2004 to 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We identified 2385 patients. Of these, 1020 patients (43%) received chemotherapy alone, 228 (10%) received RT alone, 850 (36%) received chemotherapy and RT, and 287 (12%) received no treatment. Receipt of chemotherapy alone increased over the study period, and receipt of chemoradiotherapy decreased (P < .01). The only factor predictive of receiving any RT on multivariate analysis was clinical stage T3 disease. Factors predictive of OS on multivariate analysis included receipt of chemotherapy, Hispanic race, income greater than $46,000, and presence of lung metastasis. The OS for patients treated with chemotherapy and RT was not significantly different than chemotherapy alone. Five-year OS with chemotherapy alone, RT alone, chemoradiotherapy, and no treatment were, respectively, 84%, 56%, 79%, and 46%.

CONCLUSION

Metastatic rectal cancer patients with T3 tumors were more likely to receive RT. Local RT does not improve survival for patients with metastatic rectal cancer who do not also undergo surgery. The use of chemotherapy alone for metastatic rectal cancer is increasing, and chemotherapy is associated with higher OS compared to no treatment and RT alone. This remained true even in patients older than 80 years.

A Concise Review of Pelvic Radiation Therapy (RT) for Rectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases

Background and Objective

Colorectal cancer is a major health concern as a very common cancer and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The liver is a very common site of metastatic spread for colorectal cancers, and, while nearly half of the patients develop metastases during the course of their disease, synchronous liver metastases are detected in 15% to 25% of cases. There is no standardized treatment in this setting and no consensus exists on optimal sequencing of multimodality management for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases.

Methods

Herein, we review the use of pelvic radiation therapy (RT) as part of potentially curative or palliative management of rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases.

Results

There is accumulating evidence on the utility of pelvic RT for facilitating subsequent surgery, improving local tumor control, and achieving palliation of symptoms in patients with stage IV rectal cancer. Introduction of superior imaging capabilities and contemporary RT approaches such as Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) and Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) offer improved precision and toxicity profile of radiation delivery in the modern era.

Conclusion

Even in the setting of stage IV rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases, there may be potential for extended survival and cure by aggressive management of primary tumor and metastases in selected patients. Despite lack of consensus on sequencing of treatment modalities, pelvic RT may serve as a critical component of multidisciplinary management. Resectability of primary rectal tumor and liver metastases, patient preferences, comorbidities, symptomatology, and logistical issues should be thoroughly considered in decision making for optimal management of patients.

Palliative beam radiotherapy offered real-world survival benefit to metastatic rectal cancer: A large US population-based and propensity score-matched study

Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) has been reported to effectively palliate many symptoms of patients with metastatic rectal cancer (mRC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the survival benefit of RT in mRC. Methods: A retrospective population-based cohort study was performed using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database. Patient baseline demographic characteristics between the RT and no-RT groups were compared using Pearson chi-square tests. The outcome of interest was cause-specific survival (CSS). Propensity score (PS) matching and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic power of variables on CSS. Results: A total of 8851 patients with mRC were identified in the SEER database. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that RT was a protective factor in mRC (hazard ratio [HR]= 0.702, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.665-0.741, p<0.001). In subgroup analysis, multivariate Cox analysis demonstrated that patients of both surgery and no-surgery subgroups treated with RT had better CSS than those not treated with RT (HR=0.654, 95%CI=0.607-0.704, p<0.001 for the surgery group; HR=0.779, 95%CI=0.717-0.847, p<0.001 for the no-surgery group), PS matching resulted in 4170 mRC patients and RT group presented significantly improved survival benefit than no-RT group (22.0 vs. 13.5%, P <0.001). In surgery subgroup after PS matching, in especial, RT group showed more evidently improved survival benefit than no-RT group (30.3 vs. 18.0%, p <0.001). Conclusion: Using the SEER database, we definitely demonstrated that RT was associated with a significant survival advantage beyond the relief of a variety of pelvic symptoms in the setting of mRC. This study strongly supports the use of RT in selected patients with mRC, especially in patients who have undergone surgery. More studies need to be conducted to accurately define the role of RT in mRC.

Meta-analysis of oncologic effect of primary tumor resection in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer in the era of modern systemic chemotherapy

Purpose

The management of primary tumors in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluated the survival benefits of primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer in the era of modern chemotherapy.

Methods

Multiple comprehensive databases were searched for studies comparing survival outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who did and did not undergo PTR. Outcome data were pooled, and overall effect size was calculated using random effect models.

Results

Seventeen nonrandomized studies involving 18,863 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that PTR significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56–0.71; P < 0.001) and progression free survival (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67–0.87; P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses, performed by predefined methods, also indicated that PTR improved overall patient survival.

Conclusion

Palliative resection of the primary tumor may have survival benefits in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment for these patients.

The impacts of surgery of the primary cancer and radiotherapy on the survival of patients with metastatic rectal cancer

The role of surgery of the primary cancer and radiation in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is still controversial currently, and evidence implied that colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) should be treated with difference. Hence we focused on metastatic rectal cancer (mRC) solely to compare the cancer cause-specific survival (CSS) of patients receiving varied treatments of the primary cancer: no treatment, surgery only, radiation only, and surgery plus radiation, based on the records of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A total of 8669 patients were included. Results demonstrated that the 2-year CSS was 28.1% for no treatment group, 30.7% for only radiation group, 50.2% for only surgery group, and 66.5% for surgery plus radiation group, reaching statistical difference (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the CSSs of mRC patients in the surgery group were similar regardless of resection ranges (P = 0.44). Besides, we analyzed the prognostic factors for mRC and found carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, metastasis (M) stage, Tumor (T) stage, tumor size, differentiate grade, age and marital status should be taken into consideration when estimating the prognosis. Particularly, patients with normal CEA level or M1a stage showed a significant survival advantage. Overall, present study suggested that surgery of the primary cancer and radiation might help to improve the survival of mRC patients, especially when both treatments were conducted. Our results may assist clinicians to make better treatment strategy for patients with mRC.

Phase II trial evaluating the feasibility of interdigitating folfox with chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced and metastatic rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients (pts) with metastatic rectal cancer and symptomatic primary, require local and systemic control. Chemotherapy used during chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is adequate for radiosensitisation, but suboptimal for systemic control. The aim of this phase II study was to assess tolerability, local/systemic benefits, of a novel regimen delivering interdigitating intensive chemotherapy with radical CRT.

METHODS

Eligible pts had untreated synchronous symptomatic primary/metastatic rectal cancer. A total of 12 weeks of treatment with split-course pelvic CRT (total 50.4 Gy with concurrent oxaliplatin and 5-FU infusion) alternating with FOLFOX chemotherapy. All pts staged with CT, MRI and FDG-PET pre and post treatment.

RESULTS

Twenty-six pts were treated. Rectal primary MRI stage: T3 81% and T4 15%. Liver metastases in 81%. Twenty-four pts (92%) completed the 12-week regimen. All patients received planned RT dose, and for both agents over 88% of patients achieved a relative dose intensity of >75%. Grade 3 toxicities: neutropenia 23%, diarrhoea 15%, and radiation skin reaction 12%. Grade 4 toxicity: neutropenia 15%. FDG-PET metabolic response rate for rectal primary 96%, and for metastatic disease 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of interdigitating chemotherapy with radical CRT was feasible to treat both primary and metastatic rectal cancer. High completion and response rates were encouraging.

Patterns of care of radiation therapy in patients with stage IV rectal cancer: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results analysis of patients from 2004 to 2009

BACKGROUND

According to the 2013 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, pelvic radiation therapy (RT) is one of the preferred regimens for patients with metastatic rectal cancer (mRC). The objective of this study was to analyze patterns of care and outcomes data for the receipt of RT among patients with mRC using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

Patients with stage IV rectal or rectosigmoid cancer were identified in the SEER database (2004-2009). Patients were stratified according to their primary disease site (rectum vs rectosigmoid), tumor (T) classification, and lymph node (N) classification. Treatment regimens (with or without surgical resection, with or without RT) were recorded. The Fisher exact test was used to compare RT rates based on stratified factors. Two and five-year survival rates were compared among treatment groups.

RESULTS

In total, 6873 patients with stage IV rectal cancer and 3417 patients with rectosigmoid cancer were identified. Overall, 20.5% of patients with rectal cancer underwent surgery alone, whereas 38.7% received RT with or without surgery. Within the rectosigmoid group, 51.4% of patients underwent surgery alone, and 15.1% received RT with or without surgery. The use of RT differed significantly between patients with in situ (Tis) through T2 tumors versus T3/T4 tumors (P < .001) and between those with N0 disease versus N1/N2 disease (P < .001). The 2-year and 5-year survival rates differed between treatment groups, with the highest survival rates observed among those who received combined surgery and RT.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary treatments for patients with mRC include RT with or without surgery. RT is used more commonly in patients with primary rectal (vs rectosigmoid) tumors, N0 disease, or Tis-T2 tumors. Treatment with combination surgery and RT is associated with prolonged survival.

[Treatment of colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis with chemotherapy without primary tumor resection: analysis of tumor-related complications]

INTRODUCTION

Although the conventional treatment of patients with stage iv colorectal cancer involves resection of the primary tumor followed by chemotherapy, several studies suggest that in patients with few symptoms the first and only treatment should be chemotherapy. The objective of this study is to analyze the complications related to the primary tumor in a series of patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy without surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective descriptive study. The study included all patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy without resection of the primary tumor (January 2007-February 2011).

RESULTS

The mean age of the 61 patients analyzed was 67±13 years and the performance status was 0-1 in 53 (87%). Twenty (33%) patients developed complications during follow-up. The most common complication was intestinal obstruction in 15 (25%) patients followed by perforation. Complications required surgery in 6 (10%) cases. We did not find differences in patient characteristics between those who had a complication and those without, although the complication rate in patients with a colonic stent (53%) was twice that of other patients (26%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy without surgery is a good option in most patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. However, although the percentage of patients requiring surgery is low, the total number of complications related to the primary tumor is not negligible. Studies are needed to identify those patients in whom a prophylactic colectomy could be indicated.

The Role of Surgery for Asymptomatic Primary Tumors in Unresectable Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

There are still debates regarding the appropriate primary treatment policy for asymptomatic primary colorectal lesions in cases of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. Even though there are patients with asymptomatic primary tumors when starting chemotherapy, those patients may still undergo surgery due to complications related to primary tumors in the middle of chemotherapy; therefore, controversy exists regarding surgical resection of primary colorectal lesions in cases where symptoms are absent when making a diagnosis. Thus, based on the published literature, we discuss opinions that prefer first-line surgery for primary tumors as well as opinions favoring first-line chemotherapy for treating unresectable synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer. Although the upfront chemotherapy including targeted agents is suggested as an effective treatment in recent years, the first line surgery has been a preferred treatment for decades. The first line surgery is beneficial to prolong the survival duration given the retrospective analysis of randomized trial data. So far, no prospective comparison study has only focused on the first-line treatment modality; thus, future clinical studies focusing on the survival duration and the quality of life should be performed as soon as possible. Furthermore, at this point, multidisciplinary team approaches would be helpful in finding the appropriate therapy. Regardless of symptoms, the performance status and the tumor burden should be taken into consideration as well. In case of surgical resection, minimally invasive surgery, such as laparoscopic surgery, is recommended.

The Role of Surgery for Asymptomatic Primary Tumors in Unresectable Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

There are still debates regarding the appropriate primary treatment policy for asymptomatic primary colorectal lesions in cases of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. Even though there are patients with asymptomatic primary tumors when starting chemotherapy, those patients may still undergo surgery due to complications related to primary tumors in the middle of chemotherapy; therefore, controversy exists regarding surgical resection of primary colorectal lesions in cases where symptoms are absent when making a diagnosis. Thus, based on the published literature, we discuss opinions that prefer first-line surgery for primary tumors as well as opinions favoring first-line chemotherapy for treating unresectable synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer. Although the upfront chemotherapy including targeted agents is suggested as an effective treatment in recent years, the first line surgery has been a preferred treatment for decades. The first line surgery is beneficial to prolong the survival duration given the retrospective analysis of randomized trial data. So far, no prospective comparison study has only focused on the first-line treatment modality; thus, future clinical studies focusing on the survival duration and the quality of life should be performed as soon as possible. Furthermore, at this point, multidisciplinary team approaches would be helpful in finding the appropriate therapy. Regardless of symptoms, the performance status and the tumor burden should be taken into consideration as well. In case of surgical resection, minimally invasive surgery, such as laparoscopic surgery, is recommended.

The role of postoperative pelvic radiation in stage IV rectal cancer after resection of primary tumor

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of pelvic radiotherapy (RT) in patients with stage IV rectal cancer treated with resection of primary tumor with or without metastasectomy.

Materials and Methods

Medical records of 112 patients with stage IV rectal cancer treated with resection of primary tumor between 1990 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Fifty-nine patients received synchronous or staged metastasectomy whereas fifty-three patients did not. Twenty-six patients received pelvic radiotherapy.

Results

Median overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) of all patients was 27, 70, and 11 months, respectively. Pathologic T (pT), N (pN) classification and complete metastasectomy were statistically significant factors in OS (p = 0.040, 0.020, and 0.002, respectively). RT did not improve OS or LRFS. There were no significant factors in LRFS. pT and pN classification were also significant prognostic factors in PFS (p = 0.010 and p = 0.033, respectively). In the subgroup analysis, RT improved LRFS in patients with pT4 disease (p = 0.026). The locoregional failure rate of the RT group and the non-RT group were 23.1% and 33.7%, showing no difference in the failure pattern of both groups (p = 0.260).

Conclusion

Postoperative pelvic RT did not improve LRFS of all metastatic rectal cancer patients; however, it can be recommended to patients with pT4 disease. A complete resection of metastatic masses should be performed if possible.

Palliative excisional surgery for primary colorectal cancer in patients with incurable metastatic disease. Is there a survival benefit? A systematic review

AIM

Patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases can either receive chemotherapy or palliative resection of the primary lesion. In the absence of any randomized data the choice of initial treatment in stage IV colorectal cancer is not based on firm evidence.

METHOD

A search of MEDLINE, Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Library database was performed from 1980 to 2010 for studies comparing palliative resection in stage IV colorectal cancer with other treatment modalities. Audits and observational studies were excluded. Median survival was the primary outcome measure. The morbidity and mortality of surgical and nonsurgical treatments were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (no randomized controlled trials) were identified. Most demonstrated a survival benefit for patients who underwent palliative resection. Multivariate analysis indicates that tumour burden and performance status are both major independent prognostic variables. Selection bias, incomplete follow up and nonstandardized reporting of complications make the data difficult to interpret.

CONCLUSION

The studies indicate that there may be a survival benefit for primary resection of colorectal cancer in stage IV disease. The findings suggest that resection of the primary tumour should be based on tumour burden and performance status rather than on the presence or absence of symptoms alone.

Surgery of the primary in stage IV colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases

Surgery plays an important role in the treatment of patients with limited metastatic disease of colorectal cancer (CRC). Long term survival and cure is reported in 20-50% of highly selected patients with oligometastatic disease who underwent surgery. This paper describes the role of surgery of the primary tumour in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer. Owing to the increased efficacy of chemotherapeutic regimens in stage IV colorectal cancer, complications from unresected primary tumours are relatively infrequent. The risk of emergency surgical intervention is less than 15% in patients with synchronous metastatic disease who are treated with chemotherapy. Therefore, there is a tendency among surgeons not to resect the primary tumour in case of unresectable metastases. However, it is suggested that resection of the primary tumour in case of unresectable metastatic disease might influence overall survival. All studies described in the literature (n = 24) are non-randomised and the majority is single-centre and retrospective of nature. Most studies are in favour of resection of the primary tumour in patients with symptomatic lesions. In asymptomatic patients the results are less clear, although median overall survival seems to be improved in resected patients in the majority of studies. The major drawback of all these studies is that primarily patients with a better performance status and better prognosis (less metastatic sites involved) are being operated on. Another limitation of these studies is that few if any data on the use of systemic therapy are presented, which makes it difficult to assess the relative contribution of resection on outcome. Prospective studies on this topic are warranted, and are currently being planned.

CONCLUSION

Surgery of the primary tumour in patients with synchronous metastasised CRC is controversial, although data from the literature suggest that resection might be a positive prognostic factor for survival. Therefore prospective studies on the value of resection in this setting are required.

Palliative radiotherapy in patients with a symptomatic pelvic mass of metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

To evaluate the palliative role of radiotherapy (RT) and define the effectiveness of chemotherapy combined with palliative RT (CCRT) in patients with a symptomatic pelvic mass of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Methods

From August 1995 to December 2007, 80 patients with a symptomatic pelvic mass of metastatic colorectal cancer were treated with palliative RT at Samsung Medical Center. Initial presenting symptoms were pain (68 cases), bleeding (18 cases), and obstruction (nine cases). The pelvic mass originated from rectal cancer in 58 patients (73%) and from colon cancer in 22 patients (27%). Initially 72 patients (90%) were treated with surgery, including 64 complete local excisions; 77% in colon cancer and 81% in rectal cancer. The total RT dose ranged 8-60 Gy (median: 36 Gy) with 1.8-8 Gy per fraction. When the α/β for the tumor was assumed to be 10 Gy for the biologically equivalent dose (BED), the median RT dose was 46.8 Gy₁₀ (14.4-78). Twenty one patients (26%) were treated with CCRT. Symptom palliation was assessed one month after the completion of RT.

Results

Symptom palliation was achieved in 80% of the cases. During the median follow-up period of five months (1-44 months), 45% of the cases experienced reappearance of symptoms; the median symptom control duration was five months. Median survival after RT was six months. On univariate analysis, the only significant prognostic factor for symptom control duration was BED ≥40 Gy₁₀ (p < 0.05), and CCRT was a marginally significant factor (p = 0.0644). On multivariate analysis, BED and CCRT were significant prognostic factors for symptom control duration (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

RT was an effective palliation method in patients with a symptomatic pelvic mass of metastatic colorectal cancer. For improvement of symptom control rate and duration, a BED ≥ 40 Gy₁₀ is recommended when possible. Considering the low morbidity and improved symptom palliation, CCRT might be considered in patients with good performance status.

The role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Synchronous liver metastases are detected in approximately 25% of colorectal cancer patients at diagnosis. The rates of local failure and distant metastasis are substantial in these patients, even after undergoing aggressive treatments including resection of primary and metastatic liver tumors. The purpose of this study was to determine whether adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy is beneficial for pelvic control and overall survival in rectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis after primary tumor resection.

METHODS

Among rectal cancer patients who received total mesorectal excision (TME) between 1997 and 2006 at Yonsei University Health System, eighty-nine patients diagnosed with synchronous liver metastasis were reviewed. Twenty-seven patients received adjuvant pelvic RT (group S + R), and sixty-two patients were managed without RT (group S). Thirty-six patients (58%) in group S and twenty patients (74%) in group S+R received local treatment for liver metastasis. Failure patterns and survival outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Pelvic failure was observed in twenty-five patients; twenty-one patients in group S (34%), and four patients in group S+R (15%) (p = 0.066). The two-year pelvic failure-free survival rates (PFFS) of group S and group S+R were 64.8% and 80.8% (p = 0.028), respectively, and the two-year overall survival rates (OS) were 49.1% and 70.4% (p = 0.116), respectively. In a subgroup analysis of fifty-six patients who received local treatment for liver metastasis, the two-year PFFS were 64.9% and 82.9% (p = 0.05), respectively; the two-year OS were 74.1% and 80.0% (p = 0.616) in group S (n = 36) and group S+R (n = 20), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant pelvic RT significantly reduced the pelvic failure rate but its influence on overall survival was unclear. Rectal cancer patients with synchronous liver metastasis may benefit from adjuvant pelvic RT through an increased pelvic control rate and improved quality of life.

Determinants of morbidity and survival after elective non-curative resection of stage IV colon and rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The benefit of elective primary tumor resection for non-curable stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains largely undefined. We wanted to identify risk factors for postoperative complications and short survival.

METHODS

Using a prospective database, we analyzed potential risk factors in 233 patients, who were electively operated for non-curable stage IV CRC between 1996 and 2002. Patients with recurrent tumors, resectable metastases, emergency operations, and non-resective surgery were excluded. Risk factors for increased postoperative morbidity and limited postoperative survival were identified by multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Patients with colon cancer (CC = 156) and rectal cancer (RC = 77) were comparable with regard to age, sex, comorbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, carcinoembryonic antigen levels, hepatic spread, tumor grade, resection margins, 30-day mortality (CC 5.1%, RC 3.9%) and postoperative chemotherapy. pT4 tumors, carcinomatosis, and non-anatomical resections were more common in colon cancer patients, whereas enterostomies (CC 1.3%, RC 67.5%, p < 0.0001), anastomotic leaks (CC 7.7%, RC 24.2%, p = 0.002), and total surgical complications (CC 19.9%, RC 40.3%, p = 0.001) were more frequent after rectal surgery. Independent determinants of an increased postoperative morbidity were primary rectal cancer, hepatic tumor load >50%, and comorbidity >1 organ. Prognostic factors for limited postoperative survival were hepatic tumor load >50%, pT4 tumors, lymphatic spread, R1-2 resection, and lack of chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative resection is associated with a particularly unfavorable outcome in rectal cancer patients presenting with a locally advanced tumor (pT4, expected R2 resection) or an extensive comorbidity, and in all CRC patients who show a hepatic tumor load >50%. For such patients, surgery might be contraindicated unless the tumor is immediately life-threatening.

Clinicians' attitudes towards management of metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Despite being a common problem, the optimal management of in situ primary colorectal carcinomas in patients presenting with unresectable synchronous metastases remains unknown. To date, no prospective randomized studies have been conducted to evaluate the outcomes of different approaches to management. We studied the attitudes of clinicians involved in the management of this group of patients with a view to determine their treatment preferences and assess the feasibility of conducting a randomized study addressing the role of resection of primary colorectal carcinomas in patients presenting with unresectable synchronous metastases.

METHODS

A survey of Australian colorectal surgeons, Australian medical oncologists and Victorian rural general surgeons was conducted.

RESULTS

The results indicated that with regard to preferred treatment (i) for patients with asymptomatic sigmoid or caecal primary tumours, surgeons preferred surgery followed by chemotherapy, whereas oncologists preferred chemotherapy alone; (ii) for patients with symptomatic sigmoid or caecal primary tumours, both surgeons and oncologists preferred surgery followed by chemotherapy; and (iii) for patients with metastatic rectal carcinoma, whether asymptomatic or symptomatic, both surgeons and oncologists preferred a multimodality approach to treatment. Clinicians were accepting a broad range of treatment options for patients with both asymptomatic and symptomatic primary colorectal tumours.

CONCLUSION

There is a high level of acceptability among Australian clinicians for both surgical and non-surgical approaches to management of the in situ primary colorectal tumour in patients with unresectable synchronous metastases. Further research is warranted to determine the management strategy that will yield the best outcome for these patients.

Patterns of self-reported symptoms in pancreatic cancer patients receiving chemoradiation

Pancreatic cancer is a lethal disease characterized by multiple disease-related symptoms. Chemoradiation therapy is a standard of treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Although shown to prolong survival, there is little information about treatment-related symptoms or the palliative benefits of chemoradiation. We assessed symptoms of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer receiving chemoradiation to determine the prevalence, and co-occurrence, of symptoms and to identify the extent to which symptoms interfered with function. Forty-eight patients were treated with chemoradiation on a Phase I protocol. Patients received radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions), capecitabine (median dose 825 mg/m(2) twice daily), and bevacizumab (2.5-10 mg/kg). Symptom severity and its interference with function were prospectively assessed (at presentation, during, and after chemoradiation) in 43 consenting patients using the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory. Results showed that 95% of patients reported at least one of the 13 symptoms assessed at presentation. The most commonly reported symptoms of moderate to severe (>or=5 on a 0-10 scale) intensity at presentation were lack of appetite (24%), pain (19%), fatigue (19%), and sleep disturbance (10%). We observed an increase in patients reporting moderate to severe fatigue, nausea, and sleep disturbance during chemoradiation. McNemar tests for paired binary observations showed the proportion of patients reporting moderate to severe symptoms significantly (P<0.001) decreased after chemoradiation at 94 days follow-up (lack of appetite=7%, pain=7%, fatigue=13%, sleep disturbance=7%). This study demonstrates the feasibility and usefulness of symptom assessment in chemoradiation protocols. Future studies with larger cohorts are needed to further characterize multiple symptoms associated with chemoradiation.

Preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer: rationale, technique, and results of treatment

Over the past decade, 392 patients with stage II and III rectal cancer have been managed with preoperative chemoradiation and surgery at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC). Aggressive surgical techniques such as total mesorectal excision, proctectomy with coloanal anastamosis, and multivisceral excisions have been used. Initial pelvic chemoradiation is also used in patients who present with metastases. Preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery has resulted in excellent sphincter preservation (SP) and pelvic control with minimal acute, perioperative, and late morbidity. SP has been achieved in greater numbers of patients over the past 3 years due to the increased use of coloanal anastamosis in very low tumors. There has been no increase in pelvic failure or perioperative morbidity with this practice. Patients with clinical T4 disease have significantly worse pelvic control. An assessment of the impact of CB on pelvic control and survival requires further follow-up. Poor differentiation and poor response to preoperative therapy predict a worse overall survival. Durable symptom control without colostomy has been achieved using initial chemoradiation in patients who present with metastases. Aggressive bowel management and skin care can minimize hospitalization and treatment interruption due to acute toxicity. Multidisciplinary therapy using preoperative chemoradiation and aggressive surgery has resulted in excellent SP and pelvic control. However, more effective systemic therapies are needed, especially for patients who do not respond well to preoperative chemoradiation.

Radical resection of rectal cancer primary tumor provides effective local therapy in patients with stage IV disease

BACKGROUND

The optimal use of radical surgery to palliate primary rectal cancers presenting with synchronous distant metastases is poorly defined. We have reviewed stage IV rectal cancer patients to evaluate the effectiveness of radical surgery without radiation as local therapy.

METHODS

Eighty stage IV patients with resectable primary rectal tumors treated with radical rectal surgery without radiotherapy were identified. Sixty-one (76%) patients received chemotherapy; response information was available for 34 patients.

RESULTS

Radical resection was accomplished by low anterior resection (n = 65), abdominoperineal resection (n = 11), and Hartmann's resection (n = 4). Surgical complications were seen in 12 patients (15%), with 1 death and 4 reoperations. The local recurrence rate was 6% (n = 5), with a median time to local recurrence of 14 months. Only one patient received pelvic radiotherapy as salvage treatment. One patient required subsequent diverting colostomy. Median survival was 25 months. On multivariate analysis, the extent of metastasis and response to chemotherapy were determinants of prolonged survival.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who present with distant metastases and resectable primary rectal cancers, radical surgery without radiotherapy can provide durable local control with acceptable morbidity. The extent of metastatic disease and the response to chemotherapy are the major determinants of survival. Effective systemic chemotherapy should be given high priority in the treatment of stage IV rectal cancer.

Pain and quality of life after treatment in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Because survival in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is limited, pain control and quality of life (QOL) are important parameters. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of posttreatment pain and QOL of patients with LRRC treated with nonsurgical palliation or resection and identify predictors of poor outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Posttreatment pain severity and QOL were prospectively assessed in 45 patients with LRRC using the Brief Pain Inventory and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal questionnaire.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients received nonsurgical palliation, and 30 patients underwent resection of their pelvic tumors. There was a significant association between higher posttreatment pain scores and worse QOL (P <.001). Patients treated with nonsurgical palliation reported moderate to severe pain beyond the third month of treatment. Resected patients reported comparable levels of pain during the first 3 postoperative years, particularly after bony resections; long-term survivors (beyond 3 years), however, reported minimal pain and good QOL. Female sex, pelvic/sciatic pain at presentation, total pelvic exenteration, and bony resection were associated with higher rates of moderate to severe posttreatment pain (P =.04, P <.001, P =.04, and P =.02, respectively). Pain at presentation was an independent predictor of posttreatment pain (odds ratio, 7.4 [95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 30.3]; P =.006).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LRRC treated with nonsurgical palliation or resection experience significant levels of pain after treatment. Close posttreatment pain monitoring is warranted in patients presenting with pelvic pain, and more aggressive pain management strategies may improve posttreatment QOL.

T4 rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation to the posterior pelvis followed by multivisceral resection: patterns of failure and limitations of treatment

PURPOSE

To analyze the overall pattern of treatment failure and sites of pelvic disease recurrence relative to the radiation fields used in treating patients with clinically staged T4 rectal cancer with preoperative chemoradiation followed by multivisceral resection.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 1990 and 1998, 45 patients with T4 rectal cancer were treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Clinical staging was according to the system of the American Joint Cancer Committee and was based on endoscopic ultrasonography, chemotherapy (CT), and physical examination. A diagnosis of T4 disease required evidence of invasion of a contiguous structure on CT (n = 31) or endorectal ultrasonography (n = 6), vaginal mucosal involvement on pelvic examination (n = 6), or a combination of these findings (n = 2). Chemoradiation was delivered with 18 MV photons using a 3-field belly-board technique. The median total dose was 45 Gy in all patients (range 45-63). Nine patients received a boost with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) (n = 5, 1.8-18 Gy), intraoperative RT (n = 3, 10-20 Gy), or interstitial brachytherapy (n = 1, 20 Gy). All patients received concurrent chemotherapy consisting of protracted venous infusion 5-fluorouracil (300 mg/m(2), 5 d/wk). Resection was not performed in 13 (29%) of the 45 patients because of metastases detected before resection or patient refusal. Multivisceral resection and pelvic exenteration was required in 21 (66%) and 11 (34%) of 32 patients, respectively. We compared the location of pelvic disease recurrence with the RT simulation films. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the 4-year actuarial pelvic and distant recurrent rates and the overall survival rate.

RESULTS

The median length of follow-up was 31.0 months for all patients and 40.0 months for patients alive at last follow-up. When only the resected cases were considered, the local recurrence rate was 20%. Distant metastases occurred in 44% of cases; the overall survival rate was 69%. When all patients were considered, the local recurrence rate was similar (24%), but the rate of distant recurrence (51%) was higher and the overall survival rate lower (50%). Pelvic disease was controlled in all 8 patients whose disease responded well to chemoradiation (either a histologically complete response or microscopic residual disease). Three of 4 patients with close or positive margins had pelvic recurrences despite intraoperative RT and brachytherapy. Nine of the 10 pelvic recurrences occurred in the radiation field. Elective external iliac nodal irradiation was not used, and nodal metastases were not seen in that region. In 1 case, marginal recurrence occurred in a common iliac node at the superior edge of the treatment field.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite aggressive multimodality therapy including multivisceral resection, a high rate of pelvic and distant disease recurrence occurred in patients with clinically staged T4 disease. Regional disease recurred almost exclusively in the radiation field. The intraoperative RT and interstitial brachytherapy doses used did not prevent pelvic disease recurrence in patients with close or positive margins. Novel strategies such as higher preoperative doses of RT with or without altered fractionation or more effective radiosensitizers are needed to improve locoregional control in patients with T4 disease. Future strategies must also include more effective systemic therapy.