Prognostic value of quality of life and pain in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

Risk factors and treatment strategies for local recurrence of locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

Despite advancements in total mesorectal excision (TME) and neoadjuvant radiotherapy, locally advanced rectal cancer remains challenging, impacting patient quality of life and mortality. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and assess treatment strategies for recurrence.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 682 patients diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer who were treated with neoadjuvant CRT and TME at Samsung Medical Center from 2008 to 2017. The exclusion criteria ensured a homogenous cohort. Clinical staging involved colonoscopies, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and digital rectal exam. Risk factors, treatment modalities, and oncological outcomes for local recurrence were evaluated.

RESULT

During a median 62-month follow-up, 47 patients (6.9 %) experienced local recurrence. The risk factors for local recurrence included a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM), venous invasion, and perineural invasion. Of the 47 patients with local recurrence, 25 (53.2 %) were considered resectable. Out of these, 23 patients underwent curative resections, and 15 (65.2 %) achieved R0 resection. Patients with R0 resections exhibited superior 5-year survival rates compared to R1-2 resection or non-surgical treatment, and there was no survival difference between R1-2 resection and non-surgical treatment.

CONCLUSION

In locally advanced rectal cancer, positive CRM, venous invasion, and perineural invasion were associated with local recurrence. R0 resection showed favorable outcomes, emphasizing the importance of surveillance in high-risk patients. Treatment decisions should consider these factors for improved oncologic outcomes and quality of life.

Effect of radiotherapy on long-term quality of life in recurrence-free rectal cancer survivors (LaTE study): nationwide inverse probability of treatment-weighted registry-based cohort study and survey

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy reduces local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer, but may cause harm in patients who do not experience recurrence. The aim was to investigate the impact of radiotherapy on long-term quality of life after curative treatment for rectal cancer, i.e. in patients without a recurrence during the follow-up.

METHODS

All patients operated on for rectal cancer in Norway under 75 years of age between 30 September 2007 and 1 October 2020 were identified using the Cancer Registry of Norway. Exclusion criteria were distant metastasis, recurrence and dementia. The primary outcome measure was the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index. Secondary outcome measures included the 36-item Short Form Survey. Inverse probability weights based on a multiple logistic regression model were used to balance prechosen covariates between the radiotherapy and no radiotherapy groups when assessing differences in outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 5014 invited patients, 2142 (43%) eligible patients answered the questionnaires. Of these 762 (36%) were treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy plus surgery and 1380 (64%) with surgery alone. The mean follow-up time was 6.4 and 7.4 years respectively. After propensity score matching, the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index differed significantly between irradiated and non-irradiated patients ((mean(s.d.), mean score 103.8(19.4) versus 110.8(19.6) respectively, mean difference: -6.96 (95% c.i. -8.72 to -5.19); P < 0.001). Among patients without a stoma the mean difference was -8.1 points, whereas it was -5.7 for patients with a stoma. The radiotherapy group also scored significantly lower in 7 of 8 36-item Short Form Survey domains compared with the surgery alone group.

CONCLUSION

Long-term quality of life was significantly lower in patients without a recurrence during the follow-up who received radiotherapy compared with patients who did not. These findings warrant a critical re-evaluation of the use of radiotherapy both in traditional neoadjuvant treatment and in modern organ-preserving treatment regimens.

Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The availability of high-quality patient-reported outcome (PRO) data is crucial to guiding shared decision-making in the context of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), where potential treatment benefits must be balanced against the impact of both the disease and treatment on PROs, such as quality of life. This review aimed to identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) currently being reported in LRRC and to appraise the methodological quality of studies using these measures.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched, including studies published up until 14th September 2022. Studies in adults with LRRC reporting PROMS as a primary or secondary outcome measure were included. Data were extracted concerning the methodological quality of the reporting of PROMs using criteria informed by the CONSORT-PRO checklist and the psychometric properties of the PROMs identified using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies including 1914 patients with LRRC were identified. None of the studies included in the review met all eleven criteria for the quality of reporting of PROMs. Seventeen PROMs and two clinician-reported outcome measures were identified, none of which have been validated for use in patients with LRRC.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the PROMs which are currently being used to report PROs in LRRC have been validated for use in this cohort of patients. Future studies in this disease area should focus on utilising PROMs that have undergone a robust development process including patients with LRRC, to produce data which is high quality, accurate and relevant.

Short-term outcomes of health-related quality of life in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer: multicentre, international, cross-sectional cohort study

BACKGROUND

Overall survival rates for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) continue to improve but the evidence concerning health-related quality of life (HrQoL) remains limited. The aim of this study was to describe the short-term HrQoL differences between patients undergoing surgical and palliative treatments for LRRC.

METHODS

An international, cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken at five centres across the UK and Australia. HrQoL in LRRC patients was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-CR29 and functional assessment of cancer therapy - colorectal (FACT-C) questionnaires and subgroups (curative versus palliative) were compared. Secondary analyses included the comparison of HrQoL according to the margin status, location of disease and type of treatment. Scores were interpreted using minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and Cohen effect size (ES).

RESULTS

Out of 350 eligible patients, a total of 95 patients participated, 74.0 (78.0 per cent) treated with curative intent and 21.0 (22.0 per cent) with palliative intent. Median time between LRRC diagnosis and HrQoL assessments was 4 months. Higher overall FACT-C scores denoting better HrQoL were observed in patients undergoing curative treatment, demonstrating a MCID with a mean difference of 18.5 (P < 0.001) and an ES of 0.6. Patients undergoing surgery had higher scores denoting a higher burden of symptoms for the EORTC CR29 domains of urinary frequency (P < 0.001, ES 0.3) and frequency of defaecation (P < 0.001, ES 0.4). Higher overall FACT-C scores were observed in patients who underwent an R0 resection versus an R1 resection (P = 0.051, ES 0.6). EORTC CR29 scores identified worse body image in patients with posterior/central disease (P = 0.021). Patients undergoing palliative chemoradiation reported worse HrQoL scores with a higher symptom burden on the frequency of defaecation scale compared with palliative chemotherapy (P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

Several differences in short-term HrQoL outcomes between patients undergoing curative and palliative treatment for LRRC were documented. Patients undergoing curative surgery reported better overall HrQoL and a higher burden of pelvic symptoms.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Five-Year Survival Outcomes in a Large, Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of evidence pertaining to long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer and to investigate the recurrence pattern.

DESIGN

This was a prospective analysis of a registered cohort.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at 69 institutions across Japan.

PATIENTS

A total of 1500 patients with clinical stage II-III rectal cancer located below the peritoneal reflection between January 2010 and December 2011 were included. After propensity score matching, all eligible patients, including the matched patients registered in 2014, were prospectively followed up.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Five-year relapse-free survival was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 5.6 years. Among the 964 matched patients, the 5-year relapse-free survival was 65.1% in the open group versus 63.5% in the laparoscopic group (HR 1.04; p = 0.71). Distant recurrences at rare sites, which were more frequently observed in the laparoscopic group, were significantly less salvaged (adjusted OR 0.74; p = 0.045). Postrecurrence 5-year overall survival was significantly better for patients who underwent salvage surgery than for those who did not; 55.3% vs 29.5% for patients with initial local recurrence ( p = 0.03) and 64.4% vs 30.7% for patients with distant recurrence alone ( p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Potential heterogeneity and influence of unknown confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

Five-year follow-up data demonstrated that laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer was safely performed in terms of long-term prognosis. In addition, salvage surgery for recurrent lesions was associated with prolonged postrecurrence survival, both in patients with local and distant recurrence. However, recurrence at rare sites may require further investigation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B793 .

CIRUGA LAPAROSCPICA VERSUS CIRUGA ABIERTA EN CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO RESULTADOS DE SUPERVIVENCIA A CINCO AOS EN UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE DE GRAN MAGNITUD, MULTICNTRICO Y DE PAREAMIENTO POR PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN

ANTECEDENTES:Existe una escasez de pruebas relacionadas con los resultados de supervivencia a largo plazo de la cirugía laparoscópica versus abierta para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar los resultados de supervivencia a largo plazo de la cirugía laparoscópica para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado e investigar el patrón de recurrencia.DISEÑO:Fue un análisis prospectivo de una cohorte registrada.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:El estudio se llevó a cabo en 69 instituciones en todo Japón.PACIENTES:Se incluyó un total de 1500 pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio clínico II-III ubicados por debajo de la reflección peritoneal, entre enero del 2010 y diciembre del 2011. Después del pareamiento por puntaje de propensión, se realizó un seguimiento prospectivo de todos los pacientes elegibles, incluidos los pacientes emparejados registrados en 2014.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:La supervivencia sin recaídas a cinco años fue el resultado primario.RESULTADOS:El período de seguimiento medio fue de 5,6 años. Entre los 964 pacientes emparejados, la supervivencia libre de recaída a 5 años fue del 65,1% en el grupo abierto frente al 63,5% en el grupo laparoscópico (cociente de riesgo 1,04; p = 0,71). Las recurrencias a distancia en sitios raros, que se observaron con mayor frecuencia en el grupo laparoscópico, tuvieron menor sobrevida (razón de posibilidades ajustada 0,74; p = 0,045). La supervivencia general a los 5 años después de la recidiva fue significativamente menor en los pacientes sometidos a una cirugía de rescate; 55,3% frente al 29,5% para los pacientes con recidiva local inicial ( p = 0,03) y 64,4% frente al 30,7% para los pacientes con recidiva a distancia sola ( p < 0,001).LIMITACIONES:Potencial heterogeneidad e influencia de factores de confusión desconocidos.CONCLUSIONES:El seguimiento a cinco años demostró que la cirugía laparoscópica para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado es segura en términos de pronóstico a largo plazo. Además, la cirugía de rescate de las lesiones recurrentes se asoció con una mayor supervivencia posrecurrencia, tanto en pacientes con recurrencia local como a distancia. Sin embargo, la recurrencia en sitios raros puede requerir una mayor investigación. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B793 . (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo ).

Postoperative pain management after concomitant sacrectomy for locally recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To assess pain management in patients post-sacrectomy, focusing on opioid use, and to identify the factors associated with postoperative pain.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) with concomitant sacrectomy at one of two hospitals between 2007 and 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. We examined the use of opioids preoperatively and postoperatively. Patients were classified into high and low sacrectomy groups based on the sacral bone resection level passing through the S3 vertebra.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were enrolled. Opioid use was significantly higher in the high sacrectomy group than in the low sacrectomy group at all times assessed: on postoperative days 7, 14, 30, 90, 180, and 365. Opioid use 3 months after locally recurrent rectal cancer surgery was significantly higher in patients with local re-recurrence of the tumor than in those without re-recurrence (p < 0.05), and the median morphine-equivalent opioid use 3 months postoperatively was significantly higher in the high sacrectomy group (30 vs. 0 mg/day; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use after concomitant sacrectomy for LRRC was higher in the high sacrectomy group. Prolonged postoperative pain or increasing pain was associated with local recurrence.

Patient-reported outcomes after pelvic exenteration for colorectal cancer: A systematic review

AIM

Pelvic exenteration (PE) carries high morbidity. Our aim was to analyse the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in PE patients.

METHOD

Search strategies were protocolized and registered in PROSPERO. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched with the terms 'patient reported outcomes', 'pelvic exenteration' and 'colorectal cancer'. Studies published after 1980 reporting on PROMs for at least 10 PE patients were considered. Study selection, data extraction, rating of certainty of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (ROBINS-I) were performed independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

Nineteen of 173 studies were included (13 retrospective, six prospective). All studies were low to very low quality, with an overall moderate/serious risk of bias. Studies included data on 878 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (n = 344), recurrent rectal cancer (n = 411) or cancer of unknown type (n = 123). Thirteen studies used validated questionnaires, four used non-validated measures and two used both. Questionnaires included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal questionnaire (n = 6), Short Form Health Survey (n = 6), European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (n = 6), EORTC-CR38 (n = 4), EORTC-BLM30 (n = 1), Brief Pain Inventory (n = 2), Short Form 12 (n = 1), Assessment of Quality of Life (n = 1), Short Form Six-Dimension (n = 1), the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Sphincter Function Scale (n = 1), the Cleveland Global Quality of Life (n = 1) or other (n = 4). Timing varied between studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the use of validated questionnaires increased over time, this study shows that there is a need for uniform use and timing of PROMs to enable multicentre studies.

Development of an Orthotopic Murine Model of Rectal Cancer in Conjunction With Targeted Short-Course Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

Orthotopic tumors more closely recapitulate human cancers than do ectopic models; however, precision targeting of such internal tumors for radiation therapy (RT) without inducing systemic toxicity remains a barrier. We developed an innovative murine orthotopic rectal tumor model where the insertion of clinical grade titanium fiducial clips on opposing sides of the rectal tumor allowed for targeted administration of short-course radiation therapy (SCRT). With this novel approach, clinically relevant RT regimens can be administered to orthotopic tumors to explore the biology and efficacy of radiation alone or as a combination therapy in a murine model that closely recapitulates human disease.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Murine Colon 38-luciferase tumor cells were injected into the rectal wall of syngeneic mice, and fiducial clips were applied to demarcate the tumor. An SCRT regimen consisting of 5 consecutive daily doses of 5 Gy delivered by an image-guided conformal small animal irradiator was administered 9 days after implantation. Tumor burden and survival were monitored along with histological and flow cytometric analyses on irradiated versus untreated tumors at various time points.

RESULTS

SCRT administered to orthotopic rectal tumors resulted in a reduction in tumor burden and enhanced overall survival with no apparent signs of systemic toxicity. This treatment paradigm resulted in significant reductions in tumor cellularity and increases in fibrosis and hyaluronic acid production, recapitulating the SCRT-induced effects observed in human cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

We have established a means to target murine orthotopic rectal tumors using fiducial markers with a fractionated and clinically relevant SCRT schedule that results in an RT response similar to what is observed in human rectal cancer. We also validated our model through examining various parameters associated with human cancer that are influenced by irradiation. This model can be used to further explore RT doses and scheduling, and to test combinatorial therapies.

PCR-based quantitative detection of intraperitoneal free cancer cells for predicting locoregional recurrence after rectal cancer resection

INTRODUCTION

Locoregional recurrence after curative resection remains an important issue in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical significance of quantitative detection of intraperitoneal free cancer cells by a PCR-based method for predicting locoregional recurrence after CRC resection.

METHOD

A total of 114 patients with CRC were enrolled between March 2017 and December 2018, and 95 patients with Stage I-III CRC were analyzed. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected before and after tumour resection and subjected to cytology and quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as a genetic marker.

RESULTS

2.1% of patients had positive cytology after resection, whereas 9.5% had positive CEA qRT-PCR (PCR+) after resection. Eight of nine PCR+ patients after resection had tumours in the rectum. Fifteen (15.8%) patients developed recurrence during the follow-up period, including three with locoregional recurrence. One of 86 (1.2%) PCR- patients and 2 of 9 (22.2%) PCR+ patients after resection developed locoregional recurrence. Overall and in rectal cancer patients, the 3-year cumulative risk of locoregional recurrence was 25.0% and 28.6% for PCR+ patients, which is significantly higher than PCR- patients (1.3% and 0%, P < 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Intraperitoneal free cancer cells can serve as a sensitive predictor of locoregional recurrence after rectal cancer resection. qRT-PCR for CEA can be a suitable method for detecting intraperitoneal free cancer cells in peritoneal lavage fluid.

Surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer: a narrative review

Objective

To summarize the recent literature on surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

Background

LRRC is a heterogeneous disease that requires a multidisciplinary treatment approach. The treatment and prognosis depend on the site and type of recurrence. Radical resection remains the primary method for achieving long-term survival and improving symptom control. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy can reduce tumor volume and improve the R0 resection rate. Surgeons must clearly understand pelvic anatomy, develop a detailed preoperative plan, adopt a multidisciplinary approach for the surgical resection of the tumor as well as any invaded soft tissues, vessels, and bones, and ensure proper reconstruction. However, extended radical surgery often leads to a higher risk of postoperative complications and a low quality of life.

Methods

We searched English-language articles with keywords “locally recurrent rectal cancer”, “surgery” and “multidisciplinary team” in PubMed published between January 2000 to October 2020.

Conclusions

LRRC is a complex problem. Long-term survival is not impossible following multidisciplinary treatment in appropriately selected LRRC patients. The management of LRRC relies on a specialist team that determines the biological behavior of the tumor and evaluates treatment options through multidisciplinary discussions, thereby balancing the surgical costs and benefits, alleviating postoperative complications, and improving patients’ quality of life.

Impact of a history of metastases or synchronous metastases on survival in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) frequently present with either synchronous metastases or a history of metastases. This study was conducted to evaluate whether LRRC patients without metastases have a different oncological outcome compared to patients with a history of metastases treated with curative intent or patients with potentially curable synchronous metastases.

METHOD

All consecutive LRRC patients who underwent intentionally curative surgery between 2005 and 2017 in a large tertiary hospital were retrospectively reviewed and categorized as having no metastases, a history of (curatively treated) metastases or synchronous metastases. Patients with unresectable distant metastases were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 349 patients who were analysed, 261 (75%) had no metastases, 42 (12%) had a history of metastases and 46 (13%) had synchronous metastases. The 3-year metastasis-free survival was 52%, 33% and 13% in patients without metastases, with a history of metastases, and with synchronous metastases, respectively (P < 0.001) A history of metastases did not influence overall survival (OS), but there was a trend towards a worse OS in patients with synchronous metastases compared with patients without synchronous metastases (hazard ratio 1.43; 95% CI 0.98-2.11).

CONCLUSION

LRRC patients with a history of curatively treated metastases have an OS comparable to that in patients without metastases and should therefore be treated with curative intent. However, LRRC patients with synchronous metastases have a poor metastasis-free survival and worse OS; in these patients, an individualized treatment approach to observe the behaviour of the disease is recommended.

Pathology reporting of pelvic exenteration specimens for locally recurrent rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Reporting of pelvic exenteration specimens for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can be challenging for structured pathological analysis and currently, there is a lack of specific guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of pathology reporting in a cohort of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC in a high-volume tertiary unit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of histopathology reports of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC from 1996 to 2018, the quality of pathology reporting was assessed using the Structure Reporting Protocol for Colorectal Cancer. The primary endpoint was the completeness of pathology reporting, secondary endpoints were the association between the reporting style (narrative versus synoptic), reporting period (the first half versus the second half), as well as the activity of the pathologists with the completeness of pathology reporting.

RESULTS

221 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC were included into the study. There was a high variability in completeness of pathology reporting within the cohort, ranging from 9.5% to 100%. Notably, microscopic clearance was reported in only 92.4% of the reports. Overall, a significantly higher rate of completeness was observed in synoptic reports when compared to narrative reports and in more recent compared to earlier reports. There was no significant association between the activity of pathologists and the completeness of reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a significant variability in the quality of reporting in pelvic exenteration for LRRC. The use of synoptic reporting clearly resulted in more complete reports.

Lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy for low rectal cancer: a META-analysis of recurrence rates

BACKGROUND

Locoregional recurrence (LR) remains a problem for patients with lower rectal cancer despite standardized surgery and improved neoadjuvant treatment regimens. Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) has been routine practice for some time in the Orient/East, but other regions have concerns about morbidity. As perioperative care and surgical approaches are refined, this has been revisited for selected patients. The question as to whether LPLND improves oncological outcomes was explored here.

METHODS

A systematic review of patients who underwent TME with or without LPLND from 2000 to 2020 was performed. The primary endpoint was the rate of LR between the two groups.

RESULTS

Seven papers met the predefined search criteria in which 2000 patients underwent TME alone, while 1563 patients had TME and LPLND. The rate of LR was marginally higher with TME alone when compared with TME plus LPLND, but this result was not statistically significant (9.8 vs 9.4%, odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.41-1.38, *p = 0.35). In addition, four studies reported on distant recurrence rates, with TME and LPLND showing a slight reduction in overall rates (27.3 vs 29.9%, respectively, OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45-0.92, *p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The addition of LPLND to TME is not associated with a significantly lower risk of LR in patients who undergo surgery for lower rectal cancer.

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting

BACKGROUND

Most published data on pelvic exenteration comes from high-volume quaternary units, with limited data available from outside of this setting. This study reports outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration performed in a low-volume tertiary unit with multidisciplinary support.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery for rectal/anal carcinoma, or gynaecological malignancy at Royal Adelaide Hospital between June 2008 and September 2018. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier analysis of 5-year disease-free and overall survival for patients treated with curative intent were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration were included. Most patients presented with primary rectal adenocarcinoma, and posterior and total pelvic exenterations were the most common operations performed (>90%). Median total operating time was 323 min, median hospital stay was 15 days, and the readmission rate was 14.8%. The overall complication rate (per patient) was 70.4%, and the re-intervention rate was 20.4%. Thirteen percent of patients required intensive care unit-admission, and there was one postoperative death (1.9%). R0 resection margins were achieved in 81.5% of patients, with R1 and R2 margins in 13.0 and 5.6% of patients, respectively. Estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 38.8%, and 5-year overall survival was 65.7%.

CONCLUSION

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery are acceptable in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting with suitable multidisciplinary expertise. If the required expertise is not readily available, then outside referral is recommended.

Treatment of primary rectal adenocarcinoma after prior pelvic radiation: The role of hyperfractionated accelerated reirradiation

Purpose

Previous studies have reported that hyperfractionated accelerated reirradiation can be used as part of multimodality treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer with acceptable toxicity and promising outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and toxicity of hyperfractionated accelerated reirradiation for patients with primary rectal adenocarcinoma and a history of prior pelvic radiation for other primary malignancies.

Methods and materials

We identified 10 patients with a prior history of pelvic radiation for other primary malignancies who were treated with hyperfractionated accelerated reirradiation for primary rectal adenocarcinoma. Radiation therapy was administered with 1.5 Gy twice daily fractions to a total dose of 39 Gy to 45Gy.

Results

The median follow-up time was 3.2 years (range, 0.6-9.0 years). Seven of 10 patients received surgery after reirradiation. The 3-year freedom-from-local-progression rate was 62% for all patients and 80% for patients who underwent surgery. The 3-year overall survival rate was 100%, with 3 deaths occurring at 4.7, 6.5, and 9.0 years after reirradiation. One patient had an acute Grade 3 toxicity of diarrhea, and 1 patient experienced a late Grade 3 toxicity of sacral insufficiency fracture.

Conclusions

Hyperfractionated accelerated reirradiation was well tolerated with promising rates of freedom from local progression and overall survival in patients with primary rectal cancer with a history of prior pelvic radiation therapy. This approach, along with concurrent chemotherapy and surgery, appears to be a viable treatment strategy for this patient population.

The Price We Pay for Radical Curative Pelvic Exenterations: Prevalence and Management of Pain

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenterations are extensive surgical procedures for locally advanced or recurrent malignancies of the pelvis. However, this is often at the cost of significant morbidity due to perioperative pain, which has been poorly studied.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to review perioperative pain management in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration between January 2013 and December 2014. Data were gathered from medical records and a prospectively maintained database.

SETTING

This study was conducted at a single quaternary referral center for pelvic exenteration.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients underwent pelvic exenteration at a single center.

INTERVENTIONS

Pelvic exenteration was performed in consecutive patients.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Primary outcomes were the prevalence of preoperative pain, preoperative opiate use (type, dosage), and postoperative pain (verbal numerical rating scale). Secondary outcomes included the number of pain consultations and correlations between preoperative opiate use, length of stay, and extent of resection (en bloc sacrectomy and nerve excision).

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients underwent pelvic exenteration. Sixty-one patients (61.6%) underwent major nerve resection and/or sacrectomy. Thirty patients (30%) required opiates preoperatively, with a mean daily morphine equivalent of 72.9 mg (SD 65.0 mg). Patients on preoperative opiates were more likely to have worse pain postoperatively and to require higher opiate doses and more pain consultations (9.3 vs 4.8; p < 0.001). Major nerve excision and sacrectomy were not associated with worse postoperative pain. By discharge, 60% still required opiate analgesia.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study design, the subjective nature of pain assessment because of a lack of valid methods to objectively quantify pain, and the lack of long-term follow-up were limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative pain is a significant issue among patients undergoing pelvic exenteration. One in three patients require high-dose opiates preoperatively that is associated with worse pain outcomes. Potential areas to improve pain outcomes in these complex patients could include increased use of regional anesthesia, antineuropathic agents, and opiate-sparing techniques. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A572.

Locally Advanced Disease and Pelvic Exenterations

Advanced primary and recurrent colorectal cancer can be successfully treated by experienced, dedicated centers delivering good outcomes with low mortality and morbidity. Development and implementation of a comprehensive referral pathway is to be encouraged. Multidisciplinary team management is essential in the management of this complex group of patients and is associated with significantly more complete preoperative evaluation and more accurate provision of patient information, as well as improved access to the most appropriate individualized management plan. A structured selection process can improve outcomes through standardized approaches to service delivery to provide the highest quality of care.

Moving Beyond Conventional Clinical Trial End Points in Treatment-refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Composite Quality-of-life and Symptom Control End Point

PURPOSE

This review highlights the evidence supporting symptom control and quality-of-life (QOL) measures as predictors of survival in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and describes a composite symptom control and QOL end point recently reported in a Phase III trial that may serve as a more reasonable end point of efficacy in this population.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE to identify clinical studies (including case series and observational, retrospective, and prospective studies) that reported the predictive value of QOL measures for survival in mCRC. The search was limited by the following key words: quality of life, survival, and colorectal cancer. We then performed a second search limited to studies of randomized and Phase III design in mCRC to identify studies that used QOL assessments as their primary end points. A manual search was also performed to include additional studies of potential relevance.

FINDINGS

There is increasing evidence to support that symptom control and QOL measures are predictors of survival in treatment-refractory mCRC and can serve as an alternative but equally as important end point to survival in this population. A recent large, randomized Phase III trial using a composite primary end point of lean body mass, pain, anorexia, and fatigue reported the feasibility in evaluating benefit in mCRC beyond conventional clinical trial end points.

IMPLICATIONS

Future studies in treatment-refractory mCRC may be better served by evaluating improvement in symptom control and QOL, which may otherwise serve as the best predictor of survival in last-line treatment settings.

Population-based study of factors predicting treatment intention in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

Background

Local recurrence of rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with poor survival unless curative treatment is performed. The aim of this study was to investigate predictive factors for treatment with curative intent in patients with LRRC.

Methods

Population-based data for patients treated for primary rectal cancer between 1995 and 2002, and with LRRC reported as first event were collected from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and medical records. The associations between patient-, primary tumour- and LRRC-related factors and intention of the treatment for LRRC were determined. The impact of the identified predictive factors on prognosis after treatment with curative intent was also assessed.

Results

A total of 426 patients were included in the study, of whom 149 (35·0 per cent) received treatment with curative intent. Factors significantly associated with treatment of the LRRC with palliative intent were primary surgery with abdominoperineal resection (odds ratio (OR) 5·16, 95 per cent c.i. 2·97 to 8·97), age at diagnosis of LRRC at least 80 years (OR 4·82, 2·37 to 9·80), symptoms at diagnosis (OR 2·79, 1·56 to 5·01) and non-central location of the LRRC (OR 1·79, 1·15 to 2·79). The overall 5-year survival rate was 8·9 per cent for all patients and 23·1 per cent among those treated with curative intent. In patients treated with curative intent, factors associated with increased risk of death were age 80 years or more (hazard ratio (HR) 2·44, 95 per cent c.i. 1·55 to 3·86), presence of symptoms (HR 1·92, 1·20 to 3·05), non-central tumour location (HR 1·51, 1·01 to 2·26) and presence of hydronephrosis (HR 2·02, 1·18 to 3·44).

Conclusion

Non-central location of the LRRC, presence of symptoms and age at least 80 years at diagnosis of the LRRC were associated with treatment with palliative intent.

Impact of Recurrence and Salvage Surgery on Survival After Multidisciplinary Treatment of Rectal Cancer

Purpose After preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer, patients who experience local or systemic relapse of disease may be eligible for curative salvage surgery, but the benefit of this surgery has not been fully investigated. The purpose of this study was to characterize recurrence patterns and investigate the impact of salvage surgery on survival in patients with rectal cancer after receiving multidisciplinary treatment. Patients and Methods Patients with locally advanced (cT3-4 or cN+) rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision at our institution during 1993 to 2008 were identified. We examined patterns of recurrence location, time to recurrence, treatment factors, and survival. Results A total of 735 patients were included. Tumors were mostly midrectal to lower rectal cancer, with a median distance from the anal verge of 5.0 cm. The most common recurrence site was the lung followed by the liver. Median time to recurrence was shorter in liver-only recurrence (11.2 months) than in lung-only recurrence (18.2 months) or locoregional-only recurrence (24.7 months; P = .001). Salvage surgery was performed in 57% of patients with single-site recurrence and was associated with longer survival after recurrence in patients with lung-only and liver-only recurrence ( P < .001) but not in those with locoregional-only recurrence ( P = .353). Conclusion We found a predilection for lung recurrence in patients with rectal cancer after multidisciplinary treatment. Salvage surgery was associated with prolonged survival in patients with lung-only and liver-only recurrence, but not in those with locoregional recurrence, which demonstrates a need for careful consideration of the indications for resection.

A Systematic Review to Assess Resection Margin Status After Abdominoperineal Excision and Pelvic Exenteration for Rectal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess resection margin status and its impact on survival after abdominoperineal excision and pelvic exenteration for primary or recurrent rectal cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Resection margin is important to guide therapy and to evaluate patient prognosis.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of resection margin status on survival, and a regression analysis to analyze positive resection margin rates reported in the literature.

RESULTS

The analysis included 111 studies reporting on 19,607 participants after abdominoperineal excision, and 30 studies reporting on 1326 participants after pelvic exenteration. The positive resection margin rates for abdominoperineal excision were 14.7% and 24.0% for pelvic exenteration. The overall survival and disease-free survival rates were significantly worse for patients with positive compared with negative resection margins after abdominoperineal excision [hazard ratio (HR) 2.64, P < 0.01; HR 3.70, P < 0.01, respectively] and after pelvic exenteration (HR 2.23, P < 0.01; HR 2.93, P < 0.01, respectively). For patients undergoing abdominoperineal excision with positive resection margins, the reported tumor sites were 57% anterior, 15% posterior, 10% left or right lateral, 8% circumferential, 10% unspecified. A significant decrease in positive resection margin rates was identified over time for abdominoperineal excision. Although positive resection margin rates did not significantly change with the size of the study, some small size studies reported higher than expected positive resection margin rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Resection margin status influences survival and a multidisciplinary approach in experienced centers may result in reduced positive resection margins. For advanced anterior rectal cancer, posterior pelvic exenteration instead of abdominoperineal excision may improve resection margins.

A systematic review examining quality of life following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

Pelvic exenteration is a complex surgical procedure associated with considerable morbidity. Quality of life (QoL) is a crucial metric of surgical outcome. The aim of this review was to assess the QoL following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and local recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

METHOD

A comprehensive search of studies published between 2000 and 2016 that examined QoL outcome following pelvic exenteration was performed. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Colorectal (FACT-C), SF-36 version 2, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, and Brief Pain Inventory assessments from these studies were reviewed.

RESULTS

Seven studies reporting on 382 patients were included. Baseline QoL was the strongest predictor of postoperative QoL. Female gender, total pelvic exenteration with or without bone resection, and positive surgical margins were associated with a reduced QoL. In the majority of patients, QoL gradually improved between 2 and 9 months post-operation.

CONCLUSION

QoL is an important patient-reported outcome. This review highlights factors associated with reduced postoperative QoL that should be borne in mind when surgical resection is being considered.

The utility of abbreviated patient-reported outcomes for predicting survival in early stage colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in clinical settings. Prior research suggests that PROs collected at baseline may be associated with cancer survival, but most of those studies were conducted in patients with breast or lung cancer. The objective of this study was to determine the correlation between prospectively collected PROs and cancer-specific outcomes in patients with early stage colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who had newly diagnosed stage II or III colorectal cancer from 2009 to 2010 and had a consultation at the British Columbia Cancer Agency completed the brief Psychosocial Screen for Cancer (PSSCAN) questionnaire, which collects data on patients' perceived social supports, quality of life (QOL), anxiety and depression, and general health. PROs from the PSSCAN were linked with the Gastrointestinal Cancers Outcomes Database, which contains information on patient and tumor characteristics, treatment details, and cancer outcomes. Cox regression models were constructed for overall survival (OS), and Fine and Gray regression models were developed for disease-specific survival (DSS).

RESULTS

In total, 692 patients were included. The median patient age was 67 years (range, 26-95 years), and the majority had colon cancer (61%), were diagnosed with stage III disease (54%), and received chemotherapy (58%). In general, patients felt well supported and reported good overall health and QOL. On multivariate analysis, increased fatigue was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.99; P = .00007) and DSS (HR, 1.63; P = .03), as was lack of emotional support (OS: HR, 4.36; P = .0003; DSS: HR, 1.92; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Although most patients described good overall health and QOL and indicated that they were generally well supported, patients who experienced more pronounced fatigue or lacked emotional support had a higher likelihood of worse OS and DSS. These findings suggest that abbreviated PROs can inform and assist clinicians to identify patients who have a worse prognosis and may need more vigilant follow-up. Cancer 2017;123:1839-1847. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Functioning of people with colorectal cancer during chemotherapy. Demographic and clinical determinants of quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer receiving chemotherapy. Pilot study

Cancer of the colon is one of the most common malignant tumours in both genders. Thanks to the development of diagnostic techniques, lesions can be detected early fostering full patient's recovery. The aim of this study was to investigate factors affecting quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) during chemotherapy. The research tool was a questionnaire of our own design that allows collecting demographic and clinical data and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale-Colorectal (FACT-C). The study included 90 patients. The analysis confirmed the difference between Social-Family Well-Being (SWB) and Emotional Well-Being (EWB) and in the overall assessment of quality of life and age. Taking into account the presence of stoma, a statistically significant difference was found only in the Colorectal Cancer Subscale (CCS p = .01321). Regarding the number of cycles of chemotherapy, a statistically significant difference was shown in the overall evaluation (p = .0459) and the SWB (p = .0463) area. In patients with CRC in the general assessment of quality of life, which is at a medium level, non-modifiable factors like age and gender play a minor role when compared with the group of variables related to the process and treatment of the disease.

Locally Recurrent Disease Related to Anal Canal Cancers

Surgery for anal cancer is usually reserved for patients with persistent disease or local recurrence after definitive chemoradiation therapy. Patients with local recurrence should be re-evaluated for evidence of metastatic disease using positron emission tomography-computed tomography, and the local anatomy should be delineated with MRI. Eligible patients should undergo tailored surgery with the aim of achieving an R0 resection. Management is best undertaken within a specialized multidisciplinary setting. Careful patient selection and shared decision making are paramount for achieving acceptable patient-centered outcomes.

Patient-centered outcomes to decide treatment strategy for patients with low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

For patients with low-lying rectal cancer, the feasibility of anus-preserving surgery in combination with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) has been not well established from the perspective of patient-centered outcomes.

METHODS

We investigated 278 patients with low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma from 2005 to 2012. We compared their symptoms and QOL scores of patients who underwent anus-preserving surgery with (n = 88) and without (n = 143) NACRT according to the Wexner scale, EORTC QLQ C-30, CR29, and the modified fecal incontinence quality life scale (mFIQL). Furthermore, to assess the rationale for intersphincteric resection (ISR) with NACRT, we also compared QOL of patients who underwent ISR with NACRT (n = 31) and abdominoperineal resection (APR, n = 47).

RESULTS

The adjusted mean differences of the Wexner score estimates of the patients who underwent ISR and very low anterior resection (VLAR) with or without NACRT were 5.29 (P = 0.004) and 2.67 (P = 0.009), respectively. No significant difference was observed in the QOL scores of two treatment groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the QOL or function scores of patients who underwent ISR with NACRT and APR.

CONCLUSION

The incontinence was significantly worse in patients who receive NACRT. However, there were no significant differences in their QOL or function scores. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:630-636. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Multivisceral resection for occlusive colorectal cancer: Is it justified?

BACKGROUND

The only possibility of curative surgery in primary T4, locally advanced, adherent colorectal carcinoma (LAACRC) or recurrent disease with infiltration of adjacent organs is the en bloc resection of the invaded structures to achieve clear surgical margins (R0). The role of extended resections for occlusive LAACRC remains unclear. We report on our experience on Multivisceral resections (MVR) for LAACRC patients between 2003 and 2012.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients, who were treated with MVR with curative purpose for non-metastatic disease were recruited. General epidemiologic data, clinical findings, surgical treatment and/or multimodal therapy, histo-pathological examination and follow-up were collected. In addition post-operative complications were classified. Patients with occlusive LAACRC (n = 6) were compared to patients with uncomplicated presentation (n = 16) defined according to the UICC classification.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups, in terms of median age, gender and localization of tumors. R0 resection was performed in 14 (87.5%) patients with uncomplicated tumors and in all patients with occlusive LAACRC. R1 resection was performed in 2/16 (12.5%) patients with uncomplicated disease. No peri-operative mortality was reported in patients of both groups. In the group of uncomplicated tumors, 11 patients (68.7%) were classified as pathological (p)T4 and 5 patients (31.2%) were classified pT3 whereas in the group of occlusive LAACRC the majority of patients were classified as pT4 (83.3%). Lymph node involvement occurred in 9 patients (56.2%) of the fist group and in two patients (33.3%) of the second group, respectively. The 3-year survival rates in all patients with both uncomplicated and occlusive diseases were 58.4% and 33.3%, respectively. The 3-years survival of patients with locally advanced adherent rectal cancer was significantly lower than the observed survival of patients with colon cancer (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

MVR offers cure (R0 resections) in uncomplicated and obstructive LAACRC with three years survival in 40% of patients. Patients affected by rectal cancer with occlusive disease showed significantly decreased survival in comparison with those affected by colon cancer.

Impact of multimodal therapy in locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The practice of salvaging recurrent rectal cancer has evolved. The aim of this study was to define the evolving salvage potential over time among patients with locally recurrent disease, and to identify durable determinants of long-term success.

METHODS

The study included consecutive patients with recurrent rectal cancer undergoing multimodal salvage with curative intent between 1988 and 2012. Predictors of long-term survival were defined by Cox regression analysis and compared over time. Re-recurrence and subsequent treatments were evaluated.

RESULTS

After multidisciplinary evaluation of 229 patients, salvage therapy with curative intent included preoperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy (73·4 per cent; with 41·3 per cent undergoing repeat pelvic irradiation), surgical salvage resection with or without intraoperative irradiation (36·2 per cent), followed by postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (38·0 per cent). Multivisceral resection was undertaken in 47·2 per cent and bone resection in 29·7 per cent. The R0 resection rate was 80·3 per cent. After a median follow-up of 56·5 months, the 5-year overall survival rate was 50 per cent in 2005-2012, markedly increased from 32 per cent in 1988-1996 (P = 0·044). Long-term success was associated with R0 resection (P = 0·017) and lack of secondary failure (P = 0·003). Some 125 patients (54·6 per cent) developed further recurrence at a median of 19·4 months after salvage surgery. Repeat operative rescue was feasible in 21 of 48 patients with local re-recurrence alone and in 17 of 77 with distant re-recurrence, with a median survival of 19·8 months after further recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The long-term salvage potential for recurrent rectal cancer improved significantly over time, with the introduction of an individualized treatment algorithm of multimodal treatments and surgical salvage. Durable predictors of long-term success were R0 resection at salvage operation, avoidance of secondary failure, and feasibility of repeat rescue after re-recurrence.

Development of a conceptual framework of health-related quality of life in locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

The surgical management of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) has become widely accepted to afford cure and improve quality of life in this subset of patients. Thus far, traditional surgical and oncological markers have been used to highlight the success of surgical intervention. The use of patient-reported outcomes, specifically health-related quality of life (HRQoL), is sparse in these patients. This may be in part due to the lack of well-designed, validated instruments. This study identifies HRQoL issues relevant to patients undergoing surgery for LRRC, with the aim of developing a conceptual framework of HRQoL specific to LRRC to enable measurement of patient-reported outcomes in this cohort of patients.

METHOD

Qualitative focus groups were undertaken at two institutions to identify relevant HRQoL themes. The principles of thematic content analysis were used to analysis data. NViVo10 was used to analyse data.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients participated in six consecutive focus groups. Two patterns of themes emerged related to HRQoL and healthcare service delivery and utilization. Identified themes related to HRQoL included symptoms, sexual function, psychological impact, role and social functioning and future perspective. Under healthcare service and delivery and utilization the subdomain of disease management, treatment expectations and healthcare professionals were identified.

CONCLUSION

This is the first qualitative study undertaken exclusively in patients with LRRC to ascertain relevant HRQoL outcomes. The impact of LRRC on patients is wide-ranging and extends beyond traditional HRQoL outcomes. The study operationalizes the identified outcomes into a conceptual framework, which will provide the basis for the development of a LRRC-specific patient-reported outcome measure.

Systematic review of health-related quality of life issues in locally recurrent rectal cancer

The standardization of surgical techniques supplemented with appropriate neoadjuvant chemoradiation has led to the decline in local recurrence rates of rectal cancer (LRRC) from 25-50% to 5-10%. The outcomes reported for surgical intervention in LRRC is encouraging, however, a number of controversies exist especially in the ultra-advanced and palliative setting. Incorporating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in this field could supplement traditional clinical endpoints in assessing the effectiveness of surgical intervention in this cohort. This review aimed to identify the HRQOL themes that might be relevant to patients with LRRC. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all studies reporting HRQoL in LRRC. Each study was evaluated with regards to its design and statistical methodology. A meta-synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies was undertaken to identify relevant HRQoL themes. A total of 14 studies were identified, with 501 patients, with 80% of patients undergoing surgery. HRQoL was the primary endpoint in eight studies. Eight themes were identified: physical, psychological and social impact, symptoms, financial and occupational impact, relationships with others, communication with healthcare professionals and sexual function. The impact on HRQoL is multifactorial and wide ranging, with a number of issues identified that are not included in current measures. These issues must be incorporated into the assessment of HRQoL in LRRC through the development of a validated, disease-specific tool.

Health-related quality of life and risk of colorectal cancer recurrence and All-cause death among advanced stages of colorectal cancer 1-year after diagnosis

Background

The study aimed to examine the association between health-related quality of life (HRQOL) assessed with overall survival (OS) and recurrence after diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

Overall 160 patients with advanced stage CRC were recruited in an observational study and completed the generic and condition-specific HRQOL questionnaires at the colorectal specialist outpatient clinic in Hong Kong, between 10/2009 and 07/2010. Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics including duration since diagnosis, primary tumor location and treatment modality, were collected to serve as predictor variables in regression models. All-cause death or CRC recurrence was the event of interest. Association between HRQOL with OS was assessed using Cox regression. Association between HRQOL and CRC recurrence was further modeled by competing-risks regression adjusted for the competing-risks of death from any cause.

Results

After a median follow-up of 23 months, there were 22 (16.1%) incidents of CRC recurrence and 15 (9.4%) deaths. Decreased physical functioning (hazard ratios, HR = 0.917, 95% CI:0.889-0.981) and general health of domains in SF-12 (HR = 0.846, 95% CI:0.746-0.958) or SF-6D scores (HR = 0.010, 95% CI:0.000-0.573) were associated with an increased risk of death, with adjustment of patients’ characteristics. Increased vitality (HR = 1.151, 95% CI:1.027-1.289) and mental health (HR = 1.128, 95% CI:1.005-1.265) were associated with an increased likelihood of death. In models adjusted for competing-risk of death, those with worse HRQOL was not associated with increased risk of CRC recurrence.

Conclusions

Although self-reported HRQOL was not a significant prognostic factor for CRC recurrence, the HRQOL provided independent prognostic value about mortality in patients with advanced stage of CRC.

Quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes following exenteration for pelvic malignancy

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration is highly radical surgery offering the only potential cure for locally advanced pelvic cancer. This study compared quality of life and other relevant patient-reported outcomes over 12 months for patients who did and those who did not undergo pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Consecutive patients referred for consideration of pelvic exenteration completed clinical and patient-reported outcome assessments at baseline, hospital discharge (exenteration patients only), and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Outcomes included cancer-specific quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Colorectal; FACT-C), physical and mental health status (Short Form 36 version 2), psychological distress (Distress Thermometer), and pain (study-specific composite) scores. Linear mixed modelling compared trajectories between exenteration and no-exenteration groups.

RESULTS

Among 182 patients, 148 (81.3 per cent) proceeded to exenteration. There were no baseline differences between the two groups. Among patients who had exenteration, the mean FACT-C score at baseline of 93.0 had reduced by 14·4 points at hospital discharge, but increased to 86·7 at 1 month after surgery and continued to improve, returning to baseline by 9 months. For patients in the no-exenteration group, FACT-C scores decreased between baseline and 1 month, increased slowly to 6 months and then began to decline at 9 months. There were few statistically or clinically significant differences in any patient-reported outcomes between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Quality of life and related patient-reported outcomes improve rapidly after pelvic exenteration surgery. For 9 months after surgery, these outcomes are comparable with those of similar do patients who do not have surgery; thereafter, there is a decline in patients who do not have exenteration. Pelvic exenteration can be performed with acceptable quality of life and patient-reported outcomes.

Quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer

Patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is now considered a relevant clinical outcome. This study systematically reviewed articles published in the last 5 years, focusing on the impact of rectal cancer treatment on patients' HRQoL. Of the 477 articles retrieved, 56 met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently reported comparisons were between surgical procedures (21 articles), especially between sphincter-preserving and non-sphincter preserving surgery or between stoma and stoma-free patients (13 articles), and between multimodality therapies (11 articles). Additionally, twelve articles compared patients' and healthy controls' HRQoL as primary or secondary aim. The majority of the studies were observational (84 %), controlled (66 %), cross-sectional (54 %), prospective (100 %), with a sample of more than 100 patients (59 %), and with more than 60 % of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy (50 %). The most frequently used instruments were the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30), its colorectal cancer specific module QLQ-CR38, and the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 items questionnaire. Findings from the included articles are summarised and commented, with a special focus on the comparison between surgical treatments, between irradiated and not-irradiated patients, and between patients and the general population.

Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes

BACKGROUND

The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority.

METHODS

Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus.

RESULTS

The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management.

CONCLUSION

The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

Clinical, MRI, and PET-CT criteria used by surgeons to determine suitability for pelvic exenteration surgery for recurrent rectal cancers: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection with clear margins is the major predictor of long-term survival in recurrent rectal cancer. The extent of pelvic exenteration surgery depends on many factors including clinical and radiological criteria.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to establish which clinical, MRI, and PET criteria were considered important by surgeons who perform pelvic exenteration surgery, when assessing a patient with recurrent rectal cancer for pelvic exenteration surgery.

DESIGN

A 2-stage Delphi study was conducted among an international panel of 36 colorectal surgeons recruited via a snowball-sampling method. Surgeons rated the importance of 99 clinical and radiological criteria by using a 9-point scale.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Consensus was attained when at least 85% of the panel rated criteria within 3 points.

RESULTS

Clinical factors suggestive of systemic disease, symptoms of advanced local recurrence such as pain, surgical fitness, and cognitive impairment were considered important by the panel when considering suitability for surgery. Agreement regarding the indication for surgery was reached for 20 radiological factors. Strong agreement was achieved for factors associated with tumor involvement in the axial and anterior compartments. For only 16 of these 20 radiological factors was there an agreement that a clear resection margin was likely to be achieved.

LIMITATIONS

Further rounds of Delphi may have yielded greater consensus.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified a set of criteria considered by experts to be important in evaluating patients' suitability for pelvic exenteration surgery. Evaluation of these criteria is required to determine their clinical utility in predicting a negative resection margin at pelvic exenteration surgery.

Surgery for recurrent rectal cancer: higher and wider?

AIM

There has been a steady increase in the number of centres that carry out resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). The aim of this review was to highlight the present management and suggest technical strategies that may improve survival and quality of life.

METHOD

The review identified relevant studies from an electronic search of MEDLINE and PubMed databases between 1980 and 2011. References in published articles were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Surgical intervention offers the best hope to control LRRC but the proportion of patients offered this remains small. Certain contraindications previously considered to be absolute should now be thought of as relative.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of the surgical options and a willingness to consider more aggressive options may result in more patients being considered for potentially curative resection.

Comparison of long-term survival outcome of operative vs nonoperative management of recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

Complete surgical resection is considered the best treatment for recurrent rectal cancer (RRC). The aim of the study was to compare survival outcomes from operative and nonoperative patients presenting with RRC.

METHOD

Patients with RRC whose management was discussed by a tertiary referral specialist multidisciplinary team between January 2007 and August 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The primary end-point was 3-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 127 patients with RRC, it was isolated to the pelvis in 105 and associated with distant disease at presentation in 22. From the time of primary surgery to first recurrence, 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year local recurrence rates were 22%, 72%, 85% and 96%, respectively. The number of operated patients available at 1, 2 and 3 years' follow-up was 53, 34 and 23, respectively. Of 70 patients who underwent pelvic resection for recurrence, 64% received R0, 20% received R1 and 16% received R2 resections. Corresponding 3-year overall survival rates were 69%, 56% and 20% (P=0.011). There was no significant difference in survival between R2 resection and those managed nonoperatively (hazard ratio=1.258; P=0.579). Those undergoing surgery for pelvic recurrence affecting one or more compartments had a worse prognosis than those with single-compartment involvement (hazard ratio=2.640; P=0.027). Three-year local recurrence-free survival was 80% with R0 resection vs 60% with R1 resection.

CONCLUSION

Most recurrences occur within 5 years of primary surgery, although some occur up to 10 years later. R0 resection is the treatment of choice. There was no survival benefit of R2 resection over nonresected recurrences.

Multimodality salvage of recurrent disease after local excision for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Local excision, alone or in combination with chemoradiation, is increasingly considered for rectal cancer. Higher risks of disease recurrence have been demonstrated after local excision.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes of current-era multimodality salvage for recurrent rectal cancer after local excision.

DESIGN

This was a single-institutional retrospective study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary-referral cancer center between 1993 and 2011.

PATIENTS

Forty-six patients with recurrent rectal cancer after initial local excision were included.

INTERVENTION

Multimodality salvage treatment was performed as appropriate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the pattern of disease recurrence, salvage treatments, and resultant overall and re-recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

After the initial local excision, recurrent disease was diagnosed after a median interval of 1.9 years: local/regionally in 67%, distantly in 18%, and both in 15%. Four patients (9%) had recurrence that was unsalvageable, 2 (4%) declined treatment, and 40 (87%) underwent surgical salvage. Preoperative chemoradiation was given in 30 (75%) patients. The R0 resection rate was 80%, requiring multivisceral resection (33%), total pelvic exenteration (5%), and metastasectomy (25%). The rate of sphincter preservation was 33%, and perioperative morbidity was 50%. The first site of failure after salvage was distant in 38% and was local only in 10%. The 5-year overall and 3-year re-recurrence-free survival were 63% and 43%. Pathologic stage at initial local excision, receipt of neoadjuvant chemoradiation before local excision, recurrence pattern after local excision, pathologic stage at salvage, and R0 resection at salvage influenced re-recurrence-free survival.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the referral and selection biases inherent in a small study cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure after local excision for rectal cancer may not be salvageable. When feasible, multimodality treatment, including multivisceral resection, pelvic irradiation, and chemotherapy, was associated with potentially lasting treatment-related morbidities and only modest success in long-term disease control. These findings should be compared with the expected stage-specific outcomes of standard proctectomy for early-stage rectal cancer, when local excision is being considered.

Meta-analysis of survival based on resection margin status following surgery for recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

To determine the presence and duration of survival advantages was investigated for resection margin status (R0, R1 or R2) following surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was performed for studies comparing resection margin status for LRRC. Weighted mean differences and meta-analysis of hazard ratios were used as a measure of median and overall cumulative survival.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included, providing outcome for 1460 patients undergoing surgery for LRRC. 57% underwent an R0 resection, 25% an R1 resection and 11% an R2 resection. The most commonly performed operations were abdominoperineal excision (35%), exenteration (23%) and anterior resection (21%). The range of median survival per resection margin was R0 28-92 months, R1 12-50 months, R2 6-17 months. Patients undergoing an R0 resection survived on average for 37.6 (95% confidence interval: 23.5-51.7) months longer than those undergoing R1 resection and 53.0 (31.2-74.8) months longer than those undergoing R2 resection. This correlated to a hazard ratio of 2.03 (1.73-2.38) for R0 vs R1 and 3.41 (2.21-5.25) for R0 vs R2. Patients undergoing R1 resection survived on average 13.3 (7.23-19.4) months longer than those undergoing R2 resection [hazard ratio of 1.68 (1.33-2.12)].

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing R0 resection have the greatest survival advantage following surgery for recurrent rectal cancer. There is a survival advantage for R1 over R2 resection, but there may be no benefit of R2 resection over palliative treatment.