The role of intraoperative radiotherapy in advanced rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Total pelvic exenteration extended to pelvic bones with subsequent VRAM flap reconstruction in patient with recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma following chemoradiotherapy

Anal squamous cell carcinoma, typically associated with human papillomavirus infection, remains a rare malignancy. This article outlines a case of local recurrence in a male patient with a history of HIV and hepatitis C virus infection, previously treated with chemoradiotherapy. Extensive tumour involvement called for total pelvic exenteration extended to anterior osteomuscular compartment and genitalia. The surgical approach involved multidisciplinary collaboration and detailed preoperative planning using three-dimensional reconstruction. Key surgical considerations comprised the following: achieving tumour-free margins (R0 resection), extensive osteotomies and intricate pelvic floor reconstruction with prosthetic mesh and flap reconstruction. The procedure successfully yielded an R0 resection, maintaining adequate lower limb functionality. Our case report underscores the benefits of pelvic exenteration in locally advanced or recurrent pelvic tumours, invariably following careful patient selection and exhaustive preoperative studies.

The Role of Intraoperative Radiotherapy Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has been used in the treatment of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancers for the last several decades. Given the heterogeneity of patients treated and different indications for use and dosing at different institutions, it has been difficult to discern if IORT adds any appreciable benefit to standard of care therapies. Herein, the rationale for IORT in rectal cancer is discussed along with the most modern and best available data in 2023. IORT is likely indicated in patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer with threatened margins (R0 or R1 resection) to help improve local control. High-quality imaging and multidisciplinary discussion are necessary to ensure optimal patient selection. Appropriate counseling of the patient and excellent team communication are of the utmost importance given the challenging nature of these cases and the prognostic implications of R1 and R2 resections in this patient population.

Treatment of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Review

ABSTRACT

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

Dutch national guidelines for locally recurrent rectal cancer

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

Development of a Predictive Nomogram for Circumferential Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Circumferential resection margin (CRM) is a key quality metric and predictor of oncologic outcomes and overall survival following surgery for rectal cancer. We aimed to develop a nomogram to identify patients at risk for a positive CRM in the preoperative setting.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective evaluation of the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2014 for patients with clinical stage I-III rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision. Patients were excluded for emergency operation, resection for cancer recurrence, palliative resection, transanal resection, and missing CRM status. The primary outcome was positive CRM. Secondary outcomes included overall survival.

RESULTS

There were 28,790 patients included. 2245 (7.8%) had a positive CRM. Higher tumor grade, lack of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mucinous/signet tumor histology, open approach, abdominoperineal resection, higher T stage, lymphovascular invasion, and perineural invasion were all significantly associated with positive CRM (P < 0.05) and were included in the nomogram. The C-statistic was 0.703, suggesting a good predictive model.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive CRM is associated with specific patient demographics and tumor characteristics. These factors can be used along with preoperative MRI to predict CRM positivity in the preoperative period and plan accordingly.

A prospective case series assessing the Imperial College London intraoperative radiotherapy protocol for advanced rectal cancer: an IDEAL phase 2a study

AIM

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) decreases local recurrence rates for advanced rectal cancer. Nevertheless, utilization of IORT is limited due to the associated logistical and financial challenges. The aim of this study is to describe the development and delivery of a novel IORT protocol for advanced rectal cancer that overcomes these difficulties in the context of the early phase of an IDEAL 2a study. The primary outcome measure was the ability to deliver IORT using this novel protocol with IORT-related toxicity as the secondary outcome measure.

METHOD

Consecutive patients with advanced rectal cancer expected to have involved (R1) resection margins were enrolled. After resection, 12 Gy low-energy photon IORT was delivered using the Axxent device with a custom-designed elliptical spherical balloon applicator.

RESULTS

Six patients with a median age of 47 years (range 33-88 years; five women) were enrolled between 2018 and 2019. The indication was advanced cancer in four patients and atypical invasive pelvic side wall lymph nodes in two. IORT was successfully delivered in all cases. No toxicity was encountered. Three advanced cancer patients had R1 resection and one had complete resection (R0); resection margin status could not be established for the two lymph node cases. Five patients were alive at 3.4 (2.9-4.1) year follow-up. None of the R1 cases recurred.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to describe a novel IORT protocol using low-energy photon IORT for advanced rectal cancer. IORT could be delivered in all cases and no IORT-related toxicity was encountered. Available oncological outcome data are encouraging, but further studies will be necessary to determine the oncological effectiveness of this protocol.

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Gastrointestinal Malignancies

Despite improvements in definitive therapy, many patients with gastrointestinal malignancies experience local recurrences or have unresectable disease making subsequent management often challenging and morbid. Although higher doses of radiation may offer improved local control, the ability for dose escalation of external beam radiation therapy is often limited by adjacent radiosensitive structures. Intraoperative radiation therapy allows for additional radiotherapy to be delivered directly to the tumor or areas at highest risk for local recurrence while minimizing toxicity to adjacent structures, offering potentially improved outcomes for patients with unresectable disease or those with a high risk of local recurrence.

Intra-operative Radiation Therapy for Colorectal or Anal Cancer at Risk for Margin-Positive Resection: Initial Results of a Single-Institution Registry

PURPOSE

Pelvic recurrence of rectal or anal cancers is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We report our initial experience with an aggressive intra-operative radiotherapy (IORT) program.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal or anal cancers considered to have a high likelihood of R1 or R2 resection after multi-disciplinary review underwent surgical excision and IORT using a high-dose-rate afterloader (Ir-192) and HAM applicator. Endpoints included local or distant recurrence, and acute and late toxicity graded using the American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP and the LENT-SOMA scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients, largely with prior history of both pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT, median 50.4 Gy) and surgical resection, underwent excision with IORT (median dose 12.5 Gy, range 10-15). Median follow-up was 20 months. Twelve (57%) patients had failure at the IORT site. Freedom from failure (FFF) within the IORT field was associated with resection status (FFF at 1 year 75% for R0 vs 15% for R1/2, p = 0.0065) but not re-irradiation EBRT or IORT dose (p > 0.05). Twelve, 5, and 13 patients experienced local, regional, and distant failure, respectively; 3 (14%) patients were disease-free at last follow-up. The most frequent acute toxicity was sepsis/abscess (24%). One patient (5%) required a ureteral stent; no patients developed neuropathy attributable to IORT.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with excision and IORT for locally recurrent cancer, R0 resection is a critical determinant of local control. For patients with R1/2 resection, poor disease-free outcomes warrant consideration of a different treatment strategy.

Clinical feasibility of combining intraoperative electron radiation therapy with minimally invasive surgery: a potential for electron-FLASH clinical development

BACKGROUND

Local cancer therapy by combining real-time surgical exploration and resection with delivery of a single dose of high-energy electron irradiation entails a very precise and effective local therapeutic approach. Integrating the benefits from minimally invasive surgical techniques with the very precise delivery of intraoperative electron irradiation results in an efficient combined modality therapy.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced disease, who are candidates for laparoscopic and/or thoracoscopic surgery, received an integrated multimodal management. Preoperative treatment included induction chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, followed by laparoscopic surgery and intraoperative electron radiation therapy.

RESULTS

In a period of 5 consecutive years, 125 rectal cancer patients were treated, of which 35% underwent a laparoscopic approach. We found no differences in cancer outcomes and tolerance between the open and laparoscopic groups. Two esophageal cancer patients were treated with IOeRT during thoracoscopic resection, with the resection specimens showing intense downstaging effects. Two oligo-recurrent prostatic cancer patients (isolated nodal progression) had a robotic-assisted surgical resection and post-lymphadenectomy electron boost on the vascular and lateral pelvic wall.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery is feasible to combine with intraoperative electron radiation therapy and offers a new model explored with electron-FLASH beams.

Minimum radial margin in pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to clarify the suitable radial margin (RM) for favourable outcomes after pelvic exenteration (PE), focusing on the discrepancy between the concepts of circumferential resection margin (CRM) and traditional R status.

METHODS

Seventy-three patients with locally advanced (LARC, n = 24) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC, n = 49) who underwent PE between 2006 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. Patients were histologically classified into the following 3 groups; wide RM (≥1 mm, n = 45), narrow RM (0-1 mm, n = 10), and exposed RM (n = 18). The analysis was performed not only in the entire cohort but also in each disease group separately.

RESULTS

The rates of traditional R0 (RM > 0 mm) and wide RM were 75.3% and 61.6%, respectively, resulting in the discrepancy rate of 13.7% between the two concepts. Preoperative radiotherapy was given in 12.3%. In the entire cohort, the local recurrence and overall survival (OS) rates for narrow RMs were significantly worse than those for wide RMs (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002), but were similar to those for exposed RMs. In both LARC and LRRC, RM < 1 mm resulted in significantly worse local recurrence and OS rates compared to the wide RMs. Multivariate analysis showed that RM < 1 mm was an independent risk factor for local recurrence in both LARC (HR 15.850, p = 0.015) and LRRC (HR 4.874, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Narrow and exposed RMs had an almost equal impact on local recurrence and poor OS after PE. Preoperative radiotherapy might have a key role to ensure a wide RM.