Quality of Life in Rectal Cancer Patients After Chemoradiation: Watch-and-Wait Policy Versus Standard Resection - A Matched-Controlled 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.

Alliance A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after TNT may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes.

METHODS

In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N +) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N + vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (± 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 312 evaluable patients (156 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect a 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha = 0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse event rates. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and had accrued 330 patients as of May 2024. Study support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org .

DISCUSSION

Building on data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer: Where we are and where we are going

Locally advanced rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach based on total neoadjuvant treatment with radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (ChT), followed by deferred surgery. Currently, alternatives to the standard total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) are being explored, such as new ChT regimens or the introduction of immunotherapy. With standard TNT, up to a third of patients may achieve a complete pathological response (CPR), potentially avoiding surgery. However, as of now, we lack predictive markers of response that would allow us to define criteria for a conservative organ strategy. The presence of mutations, genes, or new imaging tests is helping to define these criteria. An example of this is the diffusion coefficient in the diffusion-weighted sequence of magnetic resonance imaging and the integration of this imaging technique into RT treatment. This allows for the monitoring of the evolution of this coefficient over successive RT sessions, helping to determine which patients will achieve CPR or those who may require intensification of neoadjuvant therapy.

Imaging and Metabolic Diagnostic Methods in the Stage Assessment of Rectal Cancer

Rectal cancer (RC) is a prevalent malignancy with significant morbidity and mortality rates. The accurate staging of RC is crucial for optimal treatment planning and patient outcomes. This review aims to summarize the current literature on imaging and metabolic diagnostic methods used in the stage assessment of RC. Various imaging modalities play a pivotal role in the initial evaluation and staging of RC. These include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and endorectal ultrasound (ERUS). MRI has emerged as the gold standard for local staging due to its superior soft tissue resolution and ability to assess tumor invasion depth, lymph node involvement, and the presence of extramural vascular invasion. CT imaging provides valuable information about distant metastases and helps determine the feasibility of surgical resection. ERUS aids in assessing tumor depth, perirectal lymph nodes, and sphincter involvement. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each diagnostic modality is essential for accurate staging and treatment decisions in RC. Furthermore, the integration of multiple imaging and metabolic methods, such as PET/CT or PET/MRI, can enhance diagnostic accuracy and provide valuable prognostic information. Thus, a literature review was conducted to investigate and assess the effectiveness and accuracy of diagnostic methods, both imaging and metabolic, in the stage assessment of RC.

Shared Decision-Making, Sphincter Preservation, and Rectal Cancer Treatment: Identifying and Executing What Matters Most to Patients

Rectal cancer treatment often encompasses multiple steps and options, with benefits and risks that vary based on the individual. Additionally, patients facing rectal cancer often have preferences regarding overall quality of life, which includes bowel function, sphincter preservation, and ostomies. This article reviews these data in the context of shared decision-making approaches in an effort to better inform patients deliberating treatment options for rectal cancer.

Point/Counterpoint #2: Current Clinical Considerations With Nonoperative Management of Rectal Cancer

ABSTRACT

Locally advanced rectal cancer has historically been treated with multimodal therapy consisting of radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and total mesorectal excision. However, recent prospective trials and registry studies have demonstrated similar disease outcomes with nonoperative management for patients who experience an excellent clinical response to radiation and chemotherapy. This article reviews data regarding nonoperative management for rectal cancer, and highlights current challenges and limitations in a point-counterpoint format, in the context of two clinical cases.

Long-Term Functional Outcome After Early vs. Late Stoma Closure in Rectal Cancer Surgery: Sub-analysis of the Multicenter FORCE Trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of early stoma closure on bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients participating in the FORCE trial who underwent LAR with protective stoma were included in this study. Patients were subdivided into an early closure group (< 3 months) and late closure group (> 3 months). Endpoints of this study were the Wexner Incontinence, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), EORTC QLQ-CR29, and fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) scores at 1 year.

RESULTS

Between 2017 and 2020, 38 patients had received a diverting stoma after LAR for rectal cancer and could be included. There was no significant difference in LARS (31 vs. 30, p = 0.63) and Wexner score (6.2 vs. 5.8, p = 0.77) between the early and late closure groups. Time to stoma closure in days was not a predictor for LARS (R2 = 0.001, F (1,36) = 0.049, p = 0.83) or Wexner score (R2 = 0.008, F (1,36) = 0.287, p = 0.60) after restored continuity. There was no significant difference between any of the FIQL domains of lifestyle, coping, depression, and embarrassment. In the EORTC QLQ-29, body image scored higher in the late closure group (21.3 vs. 1.6, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Timing of stoma closure does not appear to affect long-term bowel function and quality of life, except for body image. To improve functional outcome, attention should be focused on other contributing factors.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome following Restorative Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: Can the Surgeon Have Any Meaningful Impact?

Postoperative bowel dysfunction following restorative proctectomy, commonly referred to as Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), is a common long term sequela of rectal cancer treatment. While many of the established risk factors for LARS are non-modifiable, others may be well within the surgeon's control. Several pre-, intra-, and postoperative decisions may have a significant impact on postoperative bowel function. Some of these factors include the extent of surgical resection, surgical approach, choice of anastomotic reconstruction, and use of fecal diversion. This review article summarizes the available evidence regarding how surgical decision-making can affect postoperative bowel function.

Evolving Standards of Care in the Management of Localized Colorectal Cancer

The treatment of patients with localized rectal cancer is complex and requires input from a multidisciplinary team. Baseline local staging and mismatch repair protein testing are vital to develop individualized treatment plans. There are multiple options in terms of treatment modalities and sequencing, including transanal excision, short-course radiation, long-course chemoradiation, chemotherapy doublet or triplet, nonoperative management, and immune checkpoint blockade for patients with mismatch repair deficient tumors. While localized colon cancer is typically treated with surgical resection and consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy, emerging data suggest that neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be beneficial in patients with higher-risk disease. Quality-of-life considerations are imperative to prevent potential chronic effects on psychosocial health, neuropathy, fertility, and bowel, bladder, and sexual function. The omission of radiation or surgery can mitigate these toxicities without diminishing oncologic outcomes. The optimal treatment plan and sequence is not a one-size-fits-all approach but rather should be personalized to the patient's disease burden, tumor location, comorbidities, and preferences.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society on Appropriate Use Criteria for Nonoperative Management of Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines

For patients with rectal cancer, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery (trimodality therapy) is associated with significant long-term toxicity and/or colostomy for most patients. Patient options focused on quality of life (QOL) have dramatically improved, but there remains limited guidance regarding comparative effectiveness. This systematic review and associated guidelines evaluate how various treatment strategies compare to each other in terms of oncologic outcomes and QOL. Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology were used to search for prospective and retrospective trials and meta-analyses of adequate quality within the Ovid Medline database between January 1, 2012, and June 15, 2023. These studies informed the expert panel, which rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 6 clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). The search process yielded 197 articles that advised voting. Increasing data have shown that nonoperative management (NOM) and primary surgery result in QOL benefits noted over trimodality therapy without detriment to oncologic outcomes. For patients with rectal cancer for whom total mesorectal excision would result in permanent colostomy or inadequate bowel continence, NOM was strongly recommended as usually appropriate. Restaging with tumor response assessment approximately 8 to 12 weeks after completion of radiation therapy/chemoradiation therapy was deemed a necessary component of NOM. The panel recommended active surveillance in the setting of a near-complete or complete response. In the setting of NOM, 54 to 56 Gy in 27 to 31 fractions concurrent with chemotherapy and followed by consolidation chemotherapy was recommended. The panel strongly recommends primary surgery as usually appropriate for a T3N0 high rectal tumor for which low anterior resection and adequate bowel function is possible, with adjuvant chemotherapy considered if N+. Recent data support NOM and primary surgery as important options that should be offered to eligible patients. Considering the complexity of multidisciplinary management, patients should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting, and therapy should be tailored to individual patient goals/values.

Neoadjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer: comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy has an established role in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. However, its role continues to evolve due to both advances in the available treatment modalities, and refinements in the indications for neoadjuvant treatment and subsequent surgery.

METHODS

A narrative review of the most recent relevant literature was conducted.

RESULTS

Short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have an established role in improving local but not systemic disease control in patients with rectal cancer. Total neoadjuvant therapy offers advantages over short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy, not only in terms of increased local response but also in reducing the risk of systemic relapses. Non-operative management is increasingly preferred to surgery in patients with rectal cancer and clinical complete responses but is still associated with some negative impacts on functional outcomes. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be of some benefit in patients with locally advanced colon cancer with proficient mismatch repair, although patient selection is a major challenge. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with deficient mismatch repair cancers in the colon or rectum is altering the treatment paradigm for these patients.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant treatments for patients with colon or rectal cancers continue to evolve, increasing the complexity of decision-making for patients and clinicians alike. This review describes the current guidance and most recent developments.

ALLIANCE A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

Background

Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes.

Methods

In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N+) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (+/- 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 296 evaluable patients (148 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect an 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha=0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat in EDTA tubes, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and has a current accrual of 312. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org .

Discussion

Building off of data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed the current trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 ; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Tumor regression and safe distance of distal margin after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer

Neoadjuvant therapy has been widely employed in the treatment of rectal cancer, demonstrating its utility in reducing tumor volume, downstaging tumors, and improving patient prognosis. It has become the standard preoperative treatment modality for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy varies significantly among patients, with notable differences in tumor regression outcomes. In some cases, patients exhibit substantial tumor regression, even achieving pathological complete response. The assessment of tumor regression outcomes holds crucial significance for determining surgical approaches and establishing safe margins. Nonetheless, current research on tumor regression patterns remains limited, and there is considerable controversy surrounding the determination of a safe margin after neoadjuvant therapy. In light of these factors, this study aims to summarize the primary patterns of tumor regression observed following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, categorizing them into three types: tumor shrinkage, tumor fragmentation, and mucinous lake formation. Furthermore, a comparison will be made between gross and microscopic tumor regression, highlighting the asynchronous nature of regression in the two contexts. Additionally, this study will analyze the safety of non-surgical treatment in patients who achieve complete clinical response, elucidating the necessity of surgical intervention. Lastly, the study will investigate the optimal range for safe surgical resection margins and explore the concept of a safe margin distance post-neoadjuvant therapy.

Interdisciplinary Spanish consensus on a watch-and-wait approach for rectal cancer

Watch-and-wait has emerged as a new strategy for the management of rectal cancer when a complete clinical response is achieved after neoadjuvant therapy. In an attempt to standardize this new clinical approach, initiated by the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumors (TTD), and with the participation of the Spanish Association of Coloproctology (AECP), the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP), the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (SEED), the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), and the Spanish Society of Medical Radiology (SERAM), we present herein a consensus on a watch-and-wait approach for the management of rectal cancer. We have focused on patient selection, the treatment schemes evaluated, the optimal timing for evaluating the clinical complete response, the oncologic outcomes after the implementation of this strategy, and a protocol for surveillance of these patients.

Patient-Relevant Costs for Organ Preservation versus Radical Resection in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is an evolving treatment schedule for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), allowing for organ preservation in a relevant number of patients in the case of complete response. Patients who undergo this so-called "watch and wait" approach are likely to benefit regarding their quality of life (QoL), especially if definitive ostomy could be avoided. In this work, we performed the first cost-effectiveness analysis from the patient perspective to compare costs for TNT with radical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) in the German health care system. Individual costs for patients insured with a statutory health insurance were calculated with a Markov microsimulation. A subgroup analysis from the prospective "FinTox" trial was used to calibrate the model's parameters. We found that TNT was less expensive (-1540 EUR) and simultaneously resulted in a better QoL (+0.64 QALYs) during treatment and 5-year follow-up. The average cost for patients under TNT was 4711 EUR per year, which was equivalent to 3.2% of the net household income. CRT followed by resection resulted in higher overall costs for ostomy care, medication and greater loss of earnings. Overall, TNT appeared to be more efficacious and cost-effective from a patient's point of view in the German health care system.

Do treated rectal tumors appear differently on MRI after chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy?

PURPOSE

Increasing studies have focused on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in rectal cancer. However, few studies explored the differences in radiographic variation between patients treated with NCT and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT).

METHODS

Stage II/III rectal cancer patients from March 2016 to December 2019 meeting the criteria treated with NCRT or NCT were included. MRI features, including tumor location, longitudinal length, DWI signal, MRI tumor regression grade (mrTRG), and radiomic texture features, before and after neoadjuvant treatments were reviewed.

RESULTS

116 patients with NCRT and 61 with NCT were analyzed. Among these patients, 46 patients in the NCRT group and 18 in the NCT group were responders with pathological TRG0-1. Within these responders, the mean tumor longitudinal length regression rate (TLRR) of the NCT group was 60.08 ± 11.17%, which was significantly higher than the 50.73 ± 15.28% of the NCRT group (p = 0.010). The proportion of high signal in the DWI image after NCT was higher than that of the NCRT group (88.89% vs 50.00%, p = 0.004). NCT responders had significantly higher median change rates than those of NCRT responders in 11 radiomic features, especially those shape features.

CONCLUSION

MRI images change differently between responders treated with NCRT and those with NCT in rectal cancer. The tumor volumetry and some radiomic features change more obviously in NCT responders, and the tumor signal changes more obviously in NCRT responders. During the evaluation of the response of the tumor to the neoadjuvant treatments, images of patients should be treated differently.

Association Between RAS/BRAF Mutations and Complete Response Following Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Prospective Multicentered Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of RAS/BRAF mutation on primary response rates after total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in patients with advanced rectal cancer is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess complete response rates after TNT according to RAS/BRAF mutation status.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed in patients with rectal cancer who underwent TNT with curative intent at three South Australian hospitals between 2019 and 2023. Patients were classified according to their mutation status: mutant RAS/BRAF (mutRAS) or wild-type RAS/BRAF (wtRAS). The primary endpoint was overall complete response (oCR) rate, defined as the proportion of patients who achieved clinical complete response (cCR) and/or pathological complete response (pCR).

RESULTS

Of the 150 patients eligible for inclusion, 80 patients with RAS/BRAF status available were identified. Of these, 43 (53.8%) patients were classified as mutRAS and 37 (46.3%) patients as wtRAS. Patients with mutRAS had significantly lower cCR and oCR rates after TNT than patients with wtRAS (14% vs. 37.8%, p = 0.014; 11.6% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in pCR rate between the groups. Of the 80 rectal cancer patients tested, 35 (43.8%) had metastatic disease (M1). There was no significant difference in complete M1 response rates between the groups (17.6% vs. 38.9%, p = 0.254).

CONCLUSION

RAS/BRAF mutations negatively impact primary tumor response rates after TNT in patients with advanced rectal cancer. Large-scale national studies are needed to determine whether RAS/BRAF status could be used to select optimal oncologic therapy in rectal cancer patients.

Management after non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer

Since the introduction of population-based screening, increasing numbers of T1 rectal cancers are detected and removed by local endoscopic resection. Patients can be cured with endoscopic resection alone, but there is a possibility of residual tumor cells remaining after the initial resection. These can be located intraluminally at the resection site or extraluminally in the form of (lymph node) metastases. To decrease the risk of residual cells progressing towards more advanced disease, additional treatment is usually needed. However, with the currently available risk stratification models, it remains challenging to determine who should and should not be further treated after non-curative endoscopic resection. In this review, the different management strategies for patients with non-curatively treated T1 rectal cancers are discussed, along with the available evidence for each strategy and relevant considerations for clinical decision making. Furthermore, we provide practical guidance on the management and surveillance following non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer.

Toward less invasive coloproctology: The future is out there

Medical care has undergone remarkable improvements over the past few decades. One of the most important innovative breakthroughs in modern medicine is the advent of minimally and less invasive treatments. The trend towards employing less invasive treatment has been vividly shown in the field of gastroenterology, particularly coloproctology. Parallel to foregut interventions, colorectal surgery has shifted towards a minimally invasive approach. Coloproctology, including both medical and surgical management of colorectal diseases, has undergone a remarkable paradigm shift. The treatment of both benign and malignant colorectal conditions has gradually transitioned towards more conservative and less invasive approaches. An interesting paradigm shift was the trend to avoid the need for radical resection of rectal cancer altogether in patients who showed complete response to neoadjuvant treatment. The trend of adopting less invasive approaches to treat various colorectal conditions does not seem to be stopping soon as further research on novel, more effective and safer methods is ongoing.

Optimisation of Organ Preservation treatment strategies in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy: Additional contact X-ray brachytherapy versus eXtending the observation period and local excision (OPAXX) - protocol for two multicentre, parallel, single-arm, phase II studies

INTRODUCTION

Standard treatment for patients with intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer is (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. In recent years, organ preservation aiming at improving quality of life has been explored. Patients with a complete clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy can be managed safely with a watch-and-wait approach. However, the optimal organ-preserving treatment strategy for patients with a good, but not complete clinical response remains unclear. The aim of the OPAXX study is to determine the rate of organ preservation that can be achieved in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy by additional local treatment options.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The OPAXX study is a Dutch multicentre study that investigates the efficacy of two additional local treatments aiming at organ preservation in patients with a good, but not complete response to neoadjuvant treatment (ie near-complete response or a small residual tumour mass <3 cm). The sample size will be 168 patients in total. Patients will be randomised (1:1) between two parallel single-arm phase II studies: study arm 1 involves additional contact X-ray brachytherapy (an intraluminal radiation boost), while in study arm 2 the observation period is extended followed by a second response evaluation and optional transanal local excision. The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of successful organ preservation at 1 year following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include toxicity, morbidity, oncological and functional outcomes at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Finally, an observational cohort study for patients who are not eligible for randomisation is conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial protocol has been approved by the medical ethics committee of the Netherlands Cancer Institute (METC20.1276/M20PAX). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The trial results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05772923.

Advances in MRI-Based Assessment of Rectal Cancer Post-Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Comprehensive Review

Rectal cancer presents significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, with neoadjuvant therapy playing a pivotal role in improving resectability and patient outcomes. MRI serves as a critical tool in assessing treatment response. However, differentiating viable tumor tissue from therapy-induced changes on MRI remains a complex task. In this comprehensive review, we explore treatment options for rectal cancer based on resectability status, focusing on the role of MRI in guiding therapeutic decisions. We delve into the nuances of MRI-based evaluation of treatment response following neoadjuvant therapy, paying particular attention to emerging techniques like radiomics. Drawing from our insights based on the literature, we provide essential recommendations for post-neoadjuvant therapy management of rectal cancer, all within the context of MRI-based findings.

The "Watch and Wait" Method After Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer Requiring Abdominoperineal Resection

The present study examined the therapeutic effects of preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) and predictive factors for complete clinical remission, compared the prognosis and costs of abdominoperineal resection (APR) and the "watch and wait" method (WW), and evaluated the usefulness of WW. In our department, patients with stage II-III lower rectal cancer requiring APR receive NACRT. NACRT was performed as a preoperative treatment (52 Gy + S-1: 80-120 mg/day × 25 days). Eight weeks after the completion of NACRT, rectal examination, endoscopic, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging findings were evaluated to assess its therapeutic effects. APR was indicated for patients in whom endoscopic findings suggested a residual tumor in which a deep ulcer or marginal swelling remained or lymph node metastasis. However, WW was selected for patients who refused APR after informed consent was obtained. In the APR and WW groups, 5- and 20-year treatment costs after CRT were calculated using the Medical Fee Points of Japan in 2020. No significant differences were observed in 3-year disease-free survival rates for either parameter between the two groups. Regarding expenses, treatment costs were lower in the WW group than in the APR group. Organ preservation using active surveillance with CRT for rectal cancer requiring APR is feasible with the achievement of endoluminal complete remission.

Practice-changing clinical trials in radiation oncology for gastrointestinal malignancies in 2021-2023

Gastrointestinal cancers are one of the most frequent cancers and a leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. We provide an overview of the most important practice-changing trials that were either published or presented at the international scientific meetings in 2021-2023. Highlights included reports on three phase III trials (CONCORDE/PRODIGE 26, ARTDECO, and a study by Xu et al.) that evaluated dose escalation in the definitive setting for locally advanced oesophageal cancers, as well as two phase III trials that evaluated the role of chemotherapy (neo-AEGIS) and targeted therapy (NRG/RTOG 1010) in the neoadjuvant setting for adenocarcinoma oesophageal cancers or gastroesophageal junction cancer. CheckMate 577 evaluated nivolumab in patients who had residual pathological disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by complete resection. The use of radiation therapy for borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer is also discussed (SMART and CONKO-007 trials). Stereotactic body radiation therapy followed by sorafenib was compared to sorafenib alone in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the NRG/RTOG 1112 study. New options in the management of rectal cancer are emerging such as total neoadjuvant treatment (PRODIGE 23, RAPIDO, PROSPECT), organ preservation (OPRA, OPERA), and the role of immunotherapy in patients with DNA mismatch-repair deficient/microsatellite instability. Finally, preliminary results of the ACT 4 trial that evaluated de-escalation in anal cancer are presented.

Organ sparing to cure stage IV rectal cancer: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Rectal sparing is an option for some rectal cancers with complete or good response after chemoradiotherapy (CRT); however, it has never been evaluated in patients with metastases. We assessed long-term outcomes of a rectal-sparing approach in a liver-first strategy for patients with rectal cancer with resectable liver metastases.

CASE SUMMARY

We examined patients who underwent an organ-sparing approach for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases using a liver-first strategy during 2010-2015 (n = 8). Patients received primary chemotherapy and pelvic CRT. Liver surgery was performed during the interval between CRT completion and rectal tumor re-evaluation. Clinical and oncological characteristics and long-term outcomes were assessed.All patients underwent liver metastatic resection with curative intent. The R0 rate was 100%. Six and two patients underwent local excision and a watch-and-wait (WW) approach, respectively. All patients had T3N1 tumors at diagnosis and had good clinical response after CRT. The median survival time was 60 (range, 14-127) mo. Three patients were disease free for 5, 8, and 10 years after the procedure. Five patients developed metastatic recurrence in the liver (n = 5) and/or lungs (n = 2). Only one patient developed local recurrence concurrent with metastatic recurrence 24 mo after the WW approach. Two patients died during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest good local control in patients undergoing organ-sparing strategies for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis. Prospective trials are required to validate these data and identify good candidates for these strategies.

Development and Validation of a Radiomics Model Based on Lymph-Node Regression Grading After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

The response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) varies among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), and the treatment response of lymph nodes (LNs) to nCRT is critical in implementing a watch-and-wait strategy. A robust predictive model may help personalize treatment plans to increase the chance that patients achieve a complete response. This study investigated whether radiomics features based on prenCRT magnetic resonance imaging nodes could predict treatment response in preoperative LARC LNs.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The study included 78 patients with clinical stage T3-T4, N1-2, and M0 rectal adenocarcinoma who received long-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy before surgery. Pathologists evaluated 243 LNs, of which 173 and 70 were assigned to training and validation cohorts, respectively. For each LN, 3641 radiomics features were extracted from the region of interest in high-resolution T2WI magnetic resonance imaging before nCRT. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was used for feature selection and radiomics signature building. A prediction model based on multivariate logistic analysis, combining radiomics signature and selected LN morphologic characteristics, was developed and visualized by drawing a nomogram. The model's performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and calibration curves.

RESULTS

The radiomics signature consists of 5 selected features that were effectively discriminated within the training cohort (area under the curve [AUC], 0.908; 95% CI, 0.857%-0.958%) and the validation cohort (AUC, 0.865; 95% CI, 0.757%-0.973%). The nomogram, which consisted of radiomics signature and LN morphologic characteristics (short-axis diameter and border contours), showed better calibration and discrimination in the training and validation cohorts (AUC, 0.925; 95% CI, 0.880%-0.969% and AUC, 0.918; 95% CI, 0.854%-0.983%, respectively). The decision curve analysis confirmed that the nomogram had the highest clinical utility.

CONCLUSIONS

The nodal-based radiomics model effectively predicts LNs treatment response in patients with LARC after nCRT, which could help personalize treatment plans and guide the implementation of the watch-and-wait approach in these patients.

Effect of low anterior resection syndrome on quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a common complication of anus-preserving surgery in patients with colorectal cancer, which significantly affects patients' quality of life.

AIM

To determine the relationship between the incidence of LARS and patient quality of life after colorectal cancer surgery and to establish a LARS prediction model to allow perioperative precision nursing.

METHODS

We reviewed the data from patients who underwent elective radical resection for colorectal cancer at our institution from April 2013 to June 2020 and completed the LARS score questionnaire and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life and Colorectal Cancer Module questionnaires. According to the LARS score results, the patients were divided into no LARS, mild LARS, and severe LARS groups. The incidence of LARS and the effects of this condition on patient quality of life were determined. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for the occurrence of LARS. Based on these factors, we established a risk prediction model for LARS and evaluated its performance.

RESULTS

Among the 223 patients included, 51 did not develop LARS and 171 had mild or severe LARS. The following quality of life indicators showed significant differences between patients without LARS and those with mild or severe LARS: Physical, role, emotional, and cognitive function, total health status, fatigue, pain, shortness of breath, insomnia, constipation, and diarrhea. Tumor size, partial/total mesorectal excision, colostomy, preoperative radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were identified to be independent risk factors for LARS. A LARS prediction model was successfully established, which demonstrated an accuracy of 0.808 for predicting the occurrence of LARS.

CONCLUSION

The quality of life of patients with LARS after colorectal cancer surgery is significantly reduced.

Is Nonoperative Management of Rectal Cancer Feasible?

During the past decade, the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has become more complex. Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) has increased the rates of both clinical and pathologic complete response, resulting in improved long-term oncological outcomes. The feasibility to implement nonoperative management (NOM) depends on solving current challenges such as how to correctly identify the best candidates for a NOM without compromising oncologic safety. NOM should be part of the treatment discussion of LARC, considering increasing rates of clinical complete response, potential quality of life gains, avoidance of surgical morbidity, and patient preferences.

What Is the Comparative Efficacy of Surgical, Endoscopic, Transanal Resection, and Radiotherapy Modalities in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer?

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer is a significant healthcare burden, and effective treatment is crucial. This research aims to compare the effectiveness of surgical and endoscopic resection, transanal resection, and radiotherapy.

METHODS

A literature analysis was conducted in order to identify relevant studies, by comparing the different surgical approaches and variables affecting treatment decisions. The findings were analyzed and synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment, particularly TME (total mesorectal excision), proved consistent efficacy in achieving complete tumor resection and improving long-term survival. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques were promising for early-stage tumors but were associated with higher local recurrence rates. Radiotherapy, especially in combination with chemotherapy, played a crucial role in locally advanced cases, improving local control and reducing recurrence risk. Patient data, tumor characteristics, and healthcare system factors were identified as important factors in treatment modality selection.

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment, specifically TME, remains the recommended standard approach for rectal cancer, providing excellent oncological outcomes. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques can be considered for selected early-stage cases, while radiotherapy is beneficial for locally advanced tumors. Treatment decisions should be personalized based on patient and tumor characteristics, considering the available resources and expertise within the healthcare system.

A multiple-time-scale comparative study for the added value of magnetic resonance imaging-based radiomics in predicting pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

Objective

Radiomics based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows potential for prediction of therapeutic effect to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC); however, thorough comparison between radiomics and traditional models is deficient. We aimed to construct multiple-time-scale (pretreatment, posttreatment, and combined) radiomic models to predict pathological complete response (pCR) and compare their utility to those of traditional clinical models.

Methods

In this research, 165 LARC patients undergoing nCRT followed by surgery were enrolled retrospectively, which were divided into training and testing sets in the ratio of 7:3. Morphological features on pre- and posttreatment MRI, coupled with clinical data, were evaluated by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis for constructing clinical models. Radiomic parameters were derived from pre- and posttreatment T2- and diffusion-weighted images to develop the radiomic signatures. The clinical-radiomics models were then generated. All the models were developed in the training set and then tested in the testing set, the performance of which was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Radiomic models were compared with the clinical models with the DeLong test.

Results

One hundred and sixty-five patients (median age, 55 years; age interquartile range, 47-62 years; 116 males) were enrolled in the study. The pretreatment maximum tumor length, posttreatment maximum tumor length, and magnetic resonance tumor regression grade were selected as independent predictors for pCR in the clinical models. In the testing set, the pre- and posttreatment and combined clinical models generated AUCs of 0.625, 0.842, and 0.842 for predicting pCR, respectively. The MRI-based radiomic models performed reasonably well in predicting pCR, but neither the pure radiomic signatures (AUCs, 0.734, 0.817, and 0.801 for the pre- and posttreatment and combined radiomic signatures, respectively) nor the clinical-radiomics models (AUCs, 0.734, 0.860, and 0.801 for the pre- and posttreatment and combined clinical-radiomics models, respectively) showed significant added value compared with the clinical models (all P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The MRI-based radiomic models exhibited no definite added value compared with the clinical models for predicting pCR in LARC. Radiomic models can serve as ancillary tools for tailoring adequate treatment strategies.

Validated Pretreatment Prediction Models for Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

Pretreatment response prediction is crucial to select those patients with rectal cancer who will benefit from organ preservation strategies following (intensified) neoadjuvant therapy and to avoid unnecessary toxicity in those who will not. The combination of individual predictors in multivariable prediction models might improve predictive accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and critically appraise validated pretreatment prediction models (other than radiomics-based models or image-based deep learning models) for response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with rectal cancer and provide evidence-based recommendations for future research. MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase.com, and Scopus were searched for eligible studies published up to November 2022. A total of 5006 studies were screened and 16 were included for data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). All selected models were unique and grouped into five predictor categories: clinical, combined, genetics, metabolites, and pathology. Studies generally included patients with intermediate or advanced tumor stages who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Evaluated outcomes were pathological complete response and pathological tumor response. All studies were considered to have a high risk of bias and none of the models were externally validated in an independent study. Discriminative performances, estimated with the area under the curve (AUC), ranged per predictor category from 0.60 to 0.70 (clinical), 0.78 to 0.81 (combined), 0.66 to 0.91 (genetics), 0.54 to 0.80 (metabolites), and 0.71 to 0.91 (pathology). Model calibration outcomes were reported in five studies. Two collagen feature-based models showed the best predictive performance (AUCs 0.83-0.91 and good calibration). In conclusion, some pretreatment models for response prediction in rectal cancer show encouraging predictive potential but, given the high risk of bias in these studies, their value should be evaluated in future, well-designed studies.

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).

Timing of rectal cancer surgery after short-course radiotherapy: national database study

BACKGROUND

Previous randomized trials found that a prolonged interval between short-course radiotherapy (SCRT, 25 Gy in 5 fractions) and surgery for rectal cancer (4-8 weeks, SCRT-delay) results in a lower postoperative complication rate and a higher pCR rate than SCRT and surgery within a week (SCRT-direct surgery). This study sought to confirm these results in a Dutch national database.

METHODS

Patients with intermediate-risk rectal cancer (T3(mesorectal fascia (MRF)-) N0 M0 and T1-3(MRF-) N1 M0) treated with either SCRT-delay (4-12 weeks) or SCRT-direct surgery in 2018-2021 were selected from a Dutch national colorectal cancer database. Confounders were adjusted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The primary endpoint was the 90-day postoperative complication rate. Secondary endpoints included the pCR rate. Endpoints were compared using log-binomial and Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Some 664 patients were included in the SCRT-direct surgery and 238 in the SCRT-delay group. After IPTW, the 90-day postoperative complication rate was comparable after SCRT-direct surgery and SCRT-delay (40.1 versus 42.3 per cent; risk ratio (RR) 1.1, 95 per cent c.i. 0.9 to 1.3). A pCR occurred more often after SCRT-delay than SCRT-direct surgery (10.7 versus 0.4 per cent; RR 39, 11 to 139).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in surgical complication rates between SCRT-delay and SCRT-direct, but SCRT-delay was associated with more patients having a pCR.

Patient-reported Bowel Function and Bowel-related Quality of Life After Pelvic Radiation for Rectal Adenocarcinoma: The Impact of Radiation Fractionation and Surgical Resection

INTRODUCTION

Multimodality treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) can include long-course radiotherapy (LCRT) or short course radiotherapy (SCRT). Nonoperative management is increasingly pursued for those achieving a complete clinical response. Data regarding long-term function and quality-of-life (QOL) are limited.

METHODS

Patients with LARC treated with radiotherapy from 2016 to 2020 completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy- General (FACT-G7), the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS) and the Fecal Incontinence QOL Scale (FIQOL). Univariate and multivariable linear regression analyses identified associations between clinical variables including radiation fractionation and the use of surgery versus non-operative management.

RESULTS

Of 204 patients surveyed, 124 (60.8%) responded. Median (interquartile range) time from radiation to survey completion was 30.1 (18.3-43) months. Seventy-nine (63.7%) respondents received LCRT, and 45 (36.3%) received SCRT; 101 (81.5%) respondents underwent surgery, and 23 (18.5%) pursued nonoperative management. There were no differences in LARS, FIQoL or FACT-G7 between patients receiving LCRT versus SCRT. On multivariable analysis, only nonoperative management was associated with lower LARS score signifying less bowel dysfunction. Nonoperative management and female sex were associated with a higher FIQoL score signifying less disruption and distress from fecal incontinence issues. Finally, lower BMI at the time of radiation, female sex, and higher FIQoL score were associated with higher FACT-G7 scores signifying better overall QOL.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest long-term patient-reported bowel function and QOL may be similar for individuals receiving SCRT and LCRT for the treatment of LARC, but nonoperative management may lead to improved bowel function and QOL.

New Opportunities for Minimizing Toxicity in Rectal Cancer Management

Advances in multimodal management of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), consisting of preoperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy followed by surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy, have improved local disease control and patient survival but are associated with significant risk for acute and long-term morbidity. Recently published trials, evaluating treatment dose intensification via the addition of preoperative induction or consolidation chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant therapy [TNT]), have demonstrated improved tumor response rates while maintaining acceptable toxicity. In addition, TNT has led to an increased number of patients achieving a clinical complete response and thus eligible to pursue a nonoperative, organ-preserving, watch and wait approach, thereby avoiding toxicities associated with surgery, such as bowel dysfunction and stoma-related complications. Ongoing trials using immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with mismatch repair-deficient tumors suggest that this subgroup of patients with LARC could potentially be treated with immunotherapy alone, sparing them the toxicity associated with preoperative treatment and surgery. However, the majority of rectal cancers are mismatch repair-proficient and less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibitors and require multimodal management. The synergy noted in preclinical studies between immunotherapy and radiotherapy on immunogenic tumor cell death has led to the design of ongoing clinical trials that explore the benefit of combining radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy (mainly of immune checkpoint inhibitors) and aim to increase the number of patients eligible for organ preservation.

Long-Term Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Leads to Impressive Response Rates in Rectal Cancer: Results of a German Single-Center Cohort

Intensified preoperative chemotherapy after (chemo)radiotherapy, (Total Neoadjuvant Therapy-TNT), increases pathological complete response (pCR) rates and local control. In cases of clinically complete response (cCR) and close follow-up, non-operative management (NOM) is feasible. We report early outcomes and toxicities of a long-term TNT regime in a single-center cohort. Fifteen consecutive patients with distal or middle-third locally advanced rectal cancer (UICC stage II-III) were investigated, who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (total adsorbed dose: 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions and two concomitant courses 5-fluorouracil (250 mg/m²/d)/oxaliplatin (50 mg/m²), followed by consolidating chemotherapy (nine courses of FOLFOX4). NOM was offered if staging revealed cCR 2 months after TNT, with resection performed otherwise. The primary endpoint was complete response (pCR + cCR). Treatment-related side effects were quantified for up two years after TNT. Ten patients achieved cCR, of whom five opted for NOM. Ten patients (five cCR and five non-cCR) underwent surgery, with pCR confirmed in the five patients with cCR. The main toxicities comprised leukocytopenia (13/15), fatigue (12/15) and polyneuropathy (11/15). The most relevant CTC °III + IV events were leukocytopenia (4/15), neutropenia (2/15) and diarrhea (1/15). The long-term TNT regime resulted in promising response rates that are higher than the response rates of short TNT regimes. Overall tolerability and toxicity were comparable with the results of prospective trials.

Long-term Quality of Life and Functional Outcome of Patients With Rectal Cancer Following a Watch-and-Wait Approach

Importance

A watch-and-wait approach for patients with rectal cancer and a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy is associated with better quality of life and functional outcome. Nevertheless, prospective data on both parameters are scarce.

Objective

To prospectively evaluate quality of life and functional outcome, including bowel, urinary, and sexual function, of patients following a watch-and-wait approach.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A total of 278 patients with rectal cancer and a clinical complete response or near-complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy were included in 2 prospective cohort studies: a single-center study (March 2014 to October 2017) and an ongoing multicenter study (from September 2017). Patients were observed by a watch-and-wait approach. Additional local excision or total mesorectal excision was performed for residual disease or regrowth. Data were analyzed between April 1, 2021, and August 27, 2021, for patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Quality of life was evaluated with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), EORTC-QLQ-CR38, or EORTC-QLQ-CR29 and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. The score for the questionnaires and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey ranges from 0 to 100. For some scales, a high score indicates a high level of functioning, and for others it indicates a high level of complaints and symptomatology. Functional outcome was assessed by the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score, Vaizey incontinence score, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, and Female Sexual Function Index.

Results

Of 278 patients included, 187 were male (67%), and the median age was 66 years (range, 34-85 years). In the first 24 months, 221 patients (80%) were observed by a watch-and-wait approach without requiring surgery, 18 patients (6%) underwent additional local excision, and 39 patients (14%) underwent total mesorectal excision. In general, patients observed by a watch-and-wait approach reported good quality of life, with limited variation over time. At 3 months, 56 of 221 patients (25.3%) reported major bowel dysfunction; at 12 months, 53 patients (24.0%) reported it; and at 24 months, 55 patients (24.9%) reported it. At 24 months, 48 of 151 male patients (31.8%) reported severe erectile dysfunction. For female patients, sexual satisfaction and overall sexual function decreased during follow-up. Patients who underwent local excision reported more major bowel dysfunction (10 of 18 patients [55.6%]) compared with those without additional surgery. Quality-of-life scores, however, were comparable. After total mesorectal excision, patients scored significantly worse on several quality-of-life subscales.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this study suggest that patients with rectal cancer who were observed by a watch-and-wait approach had good quality of life, with some patients reporting bowel and sexual dysfunction. Quality of life and functional outcome deteriorated when patients required surgery. These data will be useful in daily care to counsel patients on what to expect from a watch-and-wait approach.

Watch and Wait Approach for Rectal Cancer

The administration of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorrectal excision (TME) and selective use of adjuvant chemotherapy can still be considered the standard of care in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, avoiding sequelae of TME and entering a narrow follow-up program of watch and wait (W&W), in select cases that achieve a comparable clinical complete response (cCR) to nCRT, is now very attractive to both patients and clinicians. Many advances based on well-designed studies and long-term data coming from big multicenter cohorts have drawn some important conclusions and warnings regarding this strategy. In order to safely implement W&W, it is important consider proper selection of cases, best treatment options, surveillance strategy and the attitudes towards near complete responses or even tumor regrowth. The present review offers a comprehensive overview of W&W strategy from its origins to the most current literature, from a practical point of view focused on daily clinical practice, without losing sight of the most important future prospects in this area.

Watch-and-Wait is an Option in Rectal Cancer Patients: From Controversy to Common Clinical Practice

Overview of the introduction of organ preservation in rectal cancer patients and future challenges.

The Cost-effectiveness of Watch and Wait for Rectal Cancer

The existing literature suggests with a high degree of certainty that watch and wait is more cost-effective than initial total mesorectal excision. However, it is heavily reliant on poor-quality health-related quality of life data. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of organ preservation from a broader societal perspective has not been studied. Finally, the cost-effectiveness of emerging adjuncts to watch and wait for organ preservation, such as contact X-ray brachytherapy, local excision and total neoadjuvant therapy, need to be characterised.

Endoscopy and MRI for restaging early rectal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment

AIM

Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has great potential to downstage rectal cancer. Response assessment has been investigated in locally advanced rectal cancer but not in early stage rectal cancer. The aim is to characterize the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopy performed by surgical endoscopists compared to (diffusion-weighted, DWI) MRI only and a multimodal approach combining (DWI-)MRI and endoscopic information both analysed by an abdominal radiologist for response assessment in early rectal cancer after neoadjuvant CRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with neoadjuvant CRT for early distal rectal cancer (cT1-3 N0) followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery were included. Three separate reassessment groups were analysed for response assessment using endoscopic evaluation alone versus (DWI-)MRI alone versus the combination of endoscopy with (DWI-)MRI with a focus on sensitivity and specificity and analysis using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Three cohorts (N = 36, N = 25 and N = 25, respectively) were analysed for response assessment. Of the endoscopy cohort, 16 of the 36 patients had a complete response. Area under the curve was 0.69 (0.66-0.74; pooled sensitivity 55.3%, pooled specificity 80.0%). Agreement for scoring separate endoscopic features was poor to moderate. Of the (DWI-)MRI cohort, 11 of the 25 patients had a complete response. Area under the curve for (DWI-)MRI alone was 0.55 (sensitivity 72.7%, specificity 42.9%). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved to 0.68 (sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 75.0%) when (DWI-)MRI was combined with endoscopic information, with 11 out of 25 patients with a complete response. The most accurate response assessment was made by combining endoscopy and (DWI-)MRI with a high negative predictive value (90.9%).

CONCLUSION

Good and complete responders after chemoradiation of early stage rectal cancer can be best assessed using a multimodality approach combining endoscopy and (DWI-)MRI.

Response assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: Is apparent diffusion coefficient useful on 3 T magnetic resonance imaging?

AIM

To assess the diagnostic value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on 3 T device for the prediction of tumoral response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and for the response assessment after nCRT in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), using pathology as a reference.

METHODS

Forty-one patients affected by LARC undergoing 3.0 T MRI before and after nCRT were retrospectively selected. After the conventional acquisition of high resolution T2-weighted sequences, diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) was performed using a spin-echo echo-planar sequence with multiple b values (150, 500, 1000, 1500 s/mm² ). Fitted ADC values were calculated for each rectal lesion before and after nCRT by drawing a hand-made region of interest (ROI) around the tumour outline. All patients underwent surgery and pathological staging (classified according to tumour regression grading [TRG] and to tumour and node [TN]) represented the reference standard. Pretreatment ADC value (pre-ADC), ADC value obtained after nCRT (post-ADC) and the difference between post-ADC and pre-ADC (ΔADC) were correlated with both the TRG classes and the TN staging system in each patient.

RESULTS

The ADC values obtained in the post nCRT examination and the ΔADC were statistically related both to TRG (p = 0.0004; p = 0.0126, respectively) and TN (p = 0.0484; p = 0.0673, respectively) stages at histopathology. On the contrary, the pre-ADC was not related either to the TRG classes or to the lesion TN staging system (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

3 T DW-MRI using ADC value can be useful to assess the efficacy of nCRT in LARC; in fact, post-ADC and ΔADC values improve MR capability to evaluate tumour response.

Radiomics of locally advanced rectal cancer: machine learning-based prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy using pre-treatment sagittal T2-weighted MRI

PURPOSE

Variable response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is observed among individuals with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), having a significant impact on patient management. In this work, we aimed to investigate the potential value of machine learning (ML)-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiomics in predicting therapeutic response to nCRT in patients with LARC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-six patients with LARC were included in this retrospective study. Radiomic features were extracted from pre-treatment sagittal T2-weighted MRI images, with 3D segmentation. Dimension reduction was performed with a reliability analysis, pair-wise correlation analysis, analysis of variance, recursive feature elimination, Kruskal-Wallis, and Relief methods. Models were created using four different algorithms. In addition to radiomic models, clinical only and different combined models were developed and compared. The reference standard was tumor regression grade (TRG) based on the Modified Ryan Scheme (TRG 0 vs TRG 1-3). Models were compared based on net reclassification index (NRI). Clinical utility was assessed with decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

Number of features with excellent reliability is 106. The best result was achieved with radiomic only model using eight features. The area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for validation were 0.753 (standard deviation [SD], 0.082), 81.1%, 83.8%, and 75.0%; for testing, 0.705 (SD, 0.145), 73.9%, 81.2%, and 57.1%, respectively. Based on the clinical only model as reference, NRI for radiomic only model was the best. DCA also showed better clinical utility for radiomic only model.

CONCLUSIONS

ML-based T2-weighted MRI radiomics might have a potential in predicting response to nCRT in patients with LARC.

Development of prediction model of low anterior resection syndrome for colorectal cancer patients after surgery based on machine-learning technique

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a common postoperative complication in patients with colorectal cancer, which seriously affects their postoperative quality of life. At present, the aetiology of LARS is still unclear, but some risk factors have been studied. Accurate prediction and early management of medical intervention are keys to improving the quality of life of such high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVES

Based on machine-learning methods, this study used the follow-up results of postoperative patients with colorectal cancer to develop prediction models for LARS and conducted a comparative analysis between the different models.

METHODS

A total of 382 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer and undergoing surgery at West China Hospital from April 2017 to December 2020 were retrospectively selected as the development cohort. Logistic regression, support vector machine, decision tree, random forest and artificial neural network algorithms were used to construct the prediction models of the obtained dataset. The models were internally validated using cross-validation. The area under the curve and Brier score measures were used to evaluate and compare the differentiation and calibration degrees of the models. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the different models were described for clinical use.

RESULTS

A total of 342 patients were included, the incidence of LARS being 47.4% (162/342) during the six-month follow-up. After feature selection, the factors influencing the occurrence of LARS were found to be location, distance, diverting stoma, exsufflation and surgical type. The prediction models based on five machine-learning methods all showed acceptable performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The five models developed based on the machine-learning methods showed good prediction performance. However, considering the simplicity of clinical use of the model results, the logistic regression model is most recommended. The clinical applicability of these models will also need to be evaluated with external cohort data.

Patient- and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity of short-course radiotherapy with a prolonged interval to surgery for rectal cancer

AIM

A prolonged interval (>4 weeks) between short-course radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions) (SCRT-delay) and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has been associated with a decreased postoperative complication rate and offers the possibility of organ preservation in the case of a complete tumour response. This prospective cohort study systematically evaluated patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity for 8 weeks following SCRT-delay.

METHOD

Patients who were referred for SCRT-delay for intermediate risk, oligometastatic or locally advanced rectal cancer were included. Repeated measurements were done for patient-reported bowel dysfunction (measured by the low anterior resection syndrome [LARS] questionnaire and categorized as no, minor or major LARS) and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) before start of treatment (baseline), at completion of SCRT and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 weeks thereafter.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were included; 31 (61%) were men and the median age was 67 years (range 44-91). Patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity peaked at weeks 1-2 after completion of SCRT and gradually declined thereafter. Major LARS was reported by 44 patients (92%) at some time during SCRT-delay. Grade 3 radiation-induced toxicity was reported in 17 patients (33%) and concerned predominantly diarrhoea. No Grade 4-5 radiation-induced toxicity occurred.

CONCLUSION

During SCRT-delay, almost every patient experiences temporary mild-moderate radiation-induced toxicity and major LARS, but life-threatening toxicity is rare. SCRT-delay is a safe alternative to SCRT-direct surgery that should be proposed when counselling rectal cancer patients on neoadjuvant strategies.