Increasing the Interval Between Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery in Rectal Cancer

Associations between clinical characteristics and tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer

Following standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision, some patients with locally advanced rectal cancer achieve good response (pathological T0-2N0), while others show nonresponse (pathological T3-4N0 or node-positive). To date, the clinicopathological predictors of good response and the necessity of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment (ACT) in good responders remain unclear. In this retrospective study, clinicopathological characteristics were surveyed to investigate the correlation with good response; furthermore, a propensity score matching (PSM) model was designed to balance the confounding factors between good responders treated with ACT or observation. A total of 2255 patients were enrolled, including 1069 good responders and 1186 nonresponders. The results of the survival analysis showed a good response predicted a better 3-year prognosis (p < 0.001). The logistic regression analysis showed less advanced T and N stages (T3 vs. T4; N0 vs. N1-2), more neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) cycles (≥4 vs. 1-3), and delayed surgery (≥8 weeks vs. <8 weeks) were independent predictors of a good response (p < 0.05). Especially, patients treated with both more nCT cycles and a delay in surgery included the greatest number of good responders (p < 0.001). For good responders, after PSM (1:3), 235 observation cases were matched to 705 ACT cases. As compared with observation, ACT had no greater impact on prognosis analysis (p > 0.05). In conclusion, more cycles of nCT and a delay in surgery predicted a better response, and the delivery of ACT might be omitted in good responders.

Does A Longer Waiting Period After Neoadjuvant Radio-chemotherapy Improve the Oncological Prognosis of Rectal Cancer?: Three Years' Follow-up Results of the Greccar-6 Randomized Multicenter Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the 3-year survival results of the GRECCAR-6 trial.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Current data on the effect of an extended interval between radiochemotherapy (RCT) and resection for rectal cancer on the rate of complete pathological response (pCR = ypT0N0) is controversial. Furthermore, its effect on oncological outcomes is unknown.

METHODS

The GRECCAR-6 trial was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or TxN+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45-50 Gy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period. Primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rates.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients from 24 participating centers were enrolled. A total of 253 patients underwent a mesorectal excision. Overall pCR rate was 17% (43/253). Mean follow-up from surgical resection was 32 ± 8 months. Twenty-four deaths occurred with an 89% OS at 3 years. DFS was 68.7% at 3 years (75 recurrences). Three-year local and distant recurrences were 7.9% and 23.8%, respectively. The randomization group had no impact on the 3-year OS (P = 0.8868) or DFS (P = 0.9409). Distant (P = 0.7432) and local (P = 0.3944) recurrences were also not influenced by the waiting period. DFS was independently influenced by 3 factors: circumferential radial margin (CRM) ≤1 mm [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.17-3.51], ypT3-T4 (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.19-6.08) and positive lymph nodes (HR = 3.62; 95% CI, 1.89-6.91).

CONCLUSION

Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence on the oncological outcomes of T3/T4 rectal cancers.

Standard (8 weeks) vs long (12 weeks) timing to minimally-invasive surgery after NeoAdjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled parallel group trial (TiMiSNAR)

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of surgery in relation to chemoradiation is still controversial. Retrospective analysis has demonstrated in the recent decades that the regression of adenocarcinoma can be slow and not complete until after several months. More recently, increasing pathologic Complete Response rates have been demonstrated to be correlated with longer time interval. The purpose of the trial is to demonstrate if delayed timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy actually affects pathologic Complete Response and reflects on disease-free survival and overall survival rather than standard timing.

METHODS

The trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial comparing standard and delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Three-hundred and forty patients will be randomized on an equal basis to either robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 8 weeks or robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 12 weeks.

DISCUSSION

To date, it is well-know that pathologic Complete Response is associated with excellent prognosis and an overall survival of 90%. In the Lyon trial the rate of pCR or near pathologic Complete Response increased from 10.3 to 26% and in retrospective studies the increase rate was about 23-30%. These results may be explained on the relationship between radiation therapy and tumor regression: DNA damage occurs during irradiation, but cellular lysis occurs within the next weeks. Study results, whether confirmed that performing surgery after 12 weeks from neoadjuvant treatment is advantageous from a technical and oncological point of view, may change the current pathway of the treatment in those patient suffering from rectal cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT3465982.

Effect of Interval (7 or 11 weeks) Between Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy and Surgery on Complete Pathologic Response in Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial (GRECCAR-6)

Purpose A pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0N0) of a rectal tumor after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) is associated with an excellent prognosis. Several retrospective studies have investigated the effect of increasing the delay after RCT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of increasing the interval between the end of RCT and surgery on the pCR rate. Methods GRECCAR6 was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or Tx N+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45 to 50 Gy with fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included. Patients were randomly included in the 7-week or the 11-week (11w) group. Primary end point was the pCR rate defined as a ypT0N0 specimen (NCT01648894). Results A total of 265 patients from 24 centers were enrolled between October 2012 and February 2015. The majority of the tumors were cT3 (82%). After RCT, surgery was not performed in nine patients (3.4%) because of the occurrence of distant metastasis (n = 5) or other reasons. Two patients underwent local resection of the tumor scar. A total of 47 (18.6%) specimens were classified as ypT0 (four had invaded lymph nodes [8.5%]). The primary end point (ypT0N0) was not different (7 weeks: 20 of 133, 15.0% v 11w: 23 of 132, 17.4%; P = .5983). Morbidity was significantly increased in the 11w group (44.5% v 32%; P = .0404) as a result of increased medical complications (32.8% v 19.2%; P = .0137). The 11w group had a worse quality of mesorectal resection (complete mesorectum [I] 78.7% v 90%; P = .0156). Conclusion Waiting 11 weeks after RCT did not increase the rate of pCR after surgical resection. A longer waiting period may be associated with higher morbidity and more difficult surgical resection.

Radiation dose intensification in pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

To assess the role of radiation dose intensification with simultaneous integrated boost guided by 18-FDG-PET/CT in pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy (ChT-RT) for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

A prospective study was approved by the Internal Review Board. Inclusion criteria were: age >18 years old, World Health Organization performance status of 0-1, locally advanced histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the rectum within 10 cm of the anal verge, signed specific informed consent. High-dose volumes were defined including the hyper-metabolic areas of 18-FDG-PET/CT of primary tumor and the corresponding mesorectum and/or pelvic nodes with at least a standardized uptake values (SUV) of 5. A dose of 60 Gy/30 fractions was delivered. A total dose of 54 Gy/30 fractions was delivered to prophylactic areas. Capecitabine was administered concomitantly with RT for a dose of 825 mg/mq twice daily for 5 days/every week.

RESULTS

Between September 2011 and July 2015 fortypatients were recruited. At the time of the analysis, median follow up was 20 months (range 5-51). The median interval from the end of ChT-RT to surgery was 9 weeks (range 8-12). Thirty-seven patients (92.5 %) were submitted to sphincter preservation. Tumor Regression Grade (Mandard scale) was recorded as follows: grade 1 in 7 (17.5 %), grade 2 in 17 (42.5 %), grade 3 in 15 (37.5 %) and grade 4 in 1 (2.5 %). Post-surgical circumferential resection margin was negative in all patients. A tumor downstaging was reported in 62.5 % (95 % CI: 0.78-0.47). A nodes downstaging was registered in 85 % (95 % CI: 0.55-0.25). 18-FDG-PET/CT was not able to predict pCR. No correlation was found between pre-treatment SUV-max values and pCR. A metabolic tumor volume >127 cc was related to ypT ≥2 (p 0.01). Patients with TRG >2 had higher tumor lesion glycolysis values (p 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preliminary results did not confirm some advantages in terms of primary tumor downstaging/downsizing compared to conventional schedules reported in historical series. The role of 18-FDG-PET/CT in neoadjuvant rectal cancer management needs to be confirmed in further investigations. Long terms results are necessary.

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

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