The Predictive Value of Clinical Evaluation of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer

Diagnostic performance of MRI and endoscopy for assessing complete response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modalities and/or endoscopy for assessing complete response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is unclear.

PURPOSE

To summarize existing evidence on the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MRI, perfusion-weighted MRI, T2-weighted MR tumor regression grade, and/or endoscopy for assessing complete tumor response after nCRT.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive, and positive predictive values were retrieved from included studies.

RESULTS

In total, 81 studies were eligible for inclusion. Evidence suggests that combined use of MRI and endoscopy tends to improve the diagnostic performance compared to single imaging modality. The positive predictive value of a complete response varies substantially between studies. There is considerable heterogeneity between studies.

CONCLUSION

Combined re-staging tends to improve diagnostic performance compared to single imaging modality, but the vast majority of studies fail to offer true clinical value due to the study heterogeneity.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

How to measure tumour response in rectal cancer? An explanation of discrepancies and suggestions for improvement

Various methods categorize tumour response after neoadjuvant therapy, including down-staging and tumour regression grading. Response categories allow comparison of different treatments within clinical trials and predict outcome. A reproducible response categorization could identify subgroups with high or low risk for the most appropriate subsequent treatments, like watch and wait. Lack of standardization and interpretation difficulties currently limit the usability of these approaches. In this review we describe these difficulties for the evaluation of chemoradiation in rectal cancer. An alternative approach of tumour response is based on patterns of residual disease, including fragmentation. We summarise the evidence behind this alternative method of response categorisation, which explains a number of very relevant clinical discrepancies. These issues include differences between downstaging and tumour regression, high local regrowth in advanced tumours during watchful waiting procedures, the importance of resection margins, the limited value of post-treatment biopsies and the relatively poor outcome of patients with a near complete pathological response. Recognition of these patterns of response can allow meaningful development of novel biomarkers in the future.

Assessing pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review

AIM

Pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is found in 20% of patients with rectal cancer undergoing long-course chemoradiotherapy. Some authors have suggested that these patients do not need to undergo surgery and can be managed with careful follow-up, with surgery only used in the event of clinical failure. Widespread adoption of this regimen is limited by the accuracy of methods to confirm a pathological complete response (pCR).

METHOD

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify clinical, histological and radiological features in those patients with rectal cancer who achieved a pCR following chemoradiotherapy. Searches were conducted with the following keywords and MeSH search terms: 'rectal neoplasm', 'response', 'neoadjuvant', 'preoperative chemoradiation' and 'tumour response'. After review of title and abstracts, 89 articles addressing the assessment of pCR were identified.

RESULTS

Histology and clinical assessment are the most effective methods of assessment of pCR, with histology considered the gold standard. Clinical assessment is limited to low rectal tumours and is open to significant inter-rater variability, while histological examination requires a surgical specimen. Diffusion-weighted MRI and (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT demonstrate the greatest potential for the assessment of pCR, but both modalities have limited accuracy.

CONCLUSION

Determination of a pCR is crucial if a nonoperative approach is to be undertaken proactively. Various methods are available, but currently they lack sufficient sensitivity and specificity to define management. This is likely to be an area of further research in the future.

Critical appraisal of the 'wait and see' approach in rectal cancer for clinical complete responders after chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Some 10-20 per cent of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer achieve a pathological complete response (pCR) at surgery following preoperative chemoradiation (CRT). Some demonstrate a sustained clinical complete response (cCR), defined as absence of clinically detectable residual tumour after CRT, and do not undergo resection. The aim of this review was to evaluate non-operative treatment of rectal cancer after CRT, and the outcome of patients observed without radical surgery.

METHODS

A systematic computerized search identified 30 publications (9 series, 650 patients) evaluating a non-operative approach after CRT. Original data were extracted and tabulated, and study quality evaluated. The primary outcome measure was cCR. Secondary outcome measures included locoregional failure rate, disease-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

The most recent Habr-Gama series reported a low locoregional failure rate of 4·6 per cent, with 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates of 96 and 72 per cent respectively. These findings were supported by a small prospective Dutch study. However, other retrospective series have described higher recurrence rates. All studies were heterogeneous in staging, inclusion criteria, study design and rigour of follow-up after CRT, which might explain the different outcomes. The definition of cCR was inconsistent, with only partial concordance with pCR. The results suggested that patients who are observed, but subsequently fail to sustain a cCR, may fare worse than those who undergo immediate tumour resection.

CONCLUSION

The rationale of a 'wait and see' policy relies mainly on retrospective observations from a single series. Proof of principle in small low rectal cancers, where clinical assessment is easy, should not be extrapolated uncritically to more advanced cancers where nodal involvement is common. Long-term prospective observational studies with more uniform inclusion criteria are required to evaluate the risk versus benefit.

Predictive factors of tumor response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to correlate tumor response to survival and to identify predictive factors for tumor response after chemoradiation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From 1998 to 2008, 168 patients with histologically proven locally advanced adenocarcinoma treated by preoperative chemoradiation before total mesorectal excision were retrospectively studied. They received a radiation dose of 45 Gy with a concomitant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy. Analysis of tumor response was based on lowering of the T stage between pretreatment endorectal ultrasound and pathologic specimens. Overall and progression-free survival rates were correlated with tumor response. Tumor response was analyzed with predictive factors.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 34 months. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were, of 44.4% and 74.5% in the whole population, 83.4% and 83.4%, respectively, in patients with pathological complete response, 38.6% and 71.9%, respectively, in patients with tumor downstaging, and 29.1 and 58.9% respectively, in patients with absence of response. A pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level of <5 ng/ml was significantly independently associated with pathologic complete tumor response (p = 0.019). Pretreatment small tumor size (p = 0.04), pretreatment CEA level of <5 ng/ml (p = 0.008), and chemotherapy with capecitabine (vs. 5-FU) (p = 0.04) were significantly associated with tumor downstaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Downstaging and complete response after CRT improved progression-free survival and overall survival of locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. In multivariate analysis, a pretreatment CEA level of <5 ng/ml was associated with complete tumor response. Thus, small tumor size, a pretreatment CEA level of < 5 ng/ml, and use of capecitabine were associated with tumor downstaging.

Treatment for patients with rectal cancer and a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy: a decision analysis

PURPOSE

A clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy occurs in a subset of patients with rectal cancer. Management of these patients is controversial and tension exists between the recurrence risk with observation, and the impact of surgery on quality-of-life. Therefore, the objective was to develop a decision-analytic model to evaluate the relative benefits of surgery vs. observation in rectal cancer patients who achieve clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

METHODS

Clinically relevant inputs and events, including the ability to identify complete responders, likelihood of relapse and of salvage surgery after relapse, and utilities for each health state, were simulated by use of a Markov state-transition model. Transition probabilities and health-state utilities were derived from the literature and expert consensus. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of model results to assumptions. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life expectancy.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, the quality-adjusted life expectancy with surgery exceeded observation (5.63 vs. 5.34 quality-adjusted life-years). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that observation was preferred to surgery if the ability to correctly identify patients with true complete responses exceeded 58 percent, if quality-of-life after surgery was poor (utility <0.81), or if the relative reduction in recurrence risk with surgery was <43 percent when compared with observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model outlines the issues associated with surgery vs. observation, and suggests that surgery is beneficial for the average patient with rectal cancer with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy. Current limitations in the clinical assessment of patient response to chemoradiation constitute an important factor influencing our results, and therefore warrant further investigation.

Complete clinical response after preoperative chemoradiation in rectal cancer: is a "wait and see" policy justified?

PURPOSE

A proportion of patients, who receive preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced (T3, T4, NX) rectal cancer achieve a complete clinical response and a pathologic complete response in the region of 15 to 30 percent. Support is growing in the United Kingdom for the concept of "waiting to see" and not proceeding to radical surgery when a complete clinical response is observed. The purpose of this review was to use a literature search to assess how often complete clinical response is achieved after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, the concordance of this finding with pathologic complete response, and to determine whether it is feasible to observe patients who achieve complete clinical response rather than proceed to surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 218 Phase I/II or retrospective studies and 28 Phase III trials of preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiation were identified: 96 percent of trials documented the pathologic complete response, but only 38 trials presented data on the achievement of a complete clinical response/partial clinical response. Only five studies were found in which patients with clinically staged T2/T3 tumors were treated with radiotherapy/chemoradiation and did not routinely proceed to surgery and also reported on the long-term outcome of a "wait and see" policy.

DISCUSSION

It remains uncertain whether the degree of response to chemoradiation in terms of complete clinical response or pathologic complete response is a useful clinical end point. Studies that include T3 rectal cancer are associated with high local recurrence rates after nonsurgical treatment. Few studies report long-term outcome after achievement of a complete clinical response.

CONCLUSIONS

The end point of complete clinical response is inconsistently defined and seems insufficiently robust with only partial concordance with pathologic complete response. The rationale of a "wait and see" policy when complete clinical response status is achieved relies on retrospective observations, which are currently insufficient to support this policy except in patients who are recognized to be unfit for or refuse radical surgery.