Cross-Sectional Study on MRI Restaging After Chemoradiotherapy and Interval to Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Influence on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Time Interval Between the End of Neoadjuvant Therapy and Elective Resection of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer in the CRONOS Study

Importance

The treatment for extraperitoneal locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Robust evidence on the optimal time interval between NAT completion and surgery is lacking.

Objective

To assess the association of time interval between NAT completion and TME with short- and long-term outcomes. It was hypothesized that longer intervals increase the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate without increasing perioperative morbidity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included patients with LARC from 6 referral centers who completed NAT and underwent TME between January 2005 and December 2020. The cohort was divided into 3 groups depending on the time interval between NAT completion and surgery: short (≤8 weeks), intermediate (>8 and ≤12 weeks), and long (>12 weeks). The median follow-up duration was 33 months. Data analyses were conducted from May 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to homogenize the analysis groups.

Exposure

Long-course chemoradiotherapy or short-course radiotherapy with delayed surgery.

Main outcome and Measures

The primary outcome was pCR. Other histopathologic results, perioperative events, and survival outcomes constituted the secondary outcomes.

Results

Among the 1506 patients, 908 were male (60.3%), and the median (IQR) age was 68.8 (59.4-76.5) years. The short-, intermediate-, and long-interval groups included 511 patients (33.9%), 797 patients (52.9%), and 198 patients (13.1%), respectively. The overall pCR was 17.2% (259 of 1506 patients; 95% CI, 15.4%-19.2%). When compared with the intermediate-interval group, no association was observed between time intervals and pCR in short-interval (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-1.01) and long-interval (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.73-1.61) groups. The long-interval group was significantly associated with lower risk of bad response (tumor regression grade [TRG] 2-3; OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.91), systemic recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.96), higher conversion risk (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.62-6.07), minor postoperative complications (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.04-1.97), and incomplete mesorectum (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.02-3.50) when compared with the intermediate-interval group.

Conclusions and Relevance

Time intervals longer than 12 weeks were associated with improved TRG and systemic recurrence but may increase surgical complexity and minor morbidity.

How reliable is restaging MRI after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

Despite the pivotal role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in rectal cancer staging and evaluation, the reliability of restaging MRI after neoadjuvant therapy is still debatable. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of restaging MRI by comparing post-neoadjuvant MRI findings with those of the final pathology.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of the medical records of adult rectal cancer patients who had restaging MRI following neoadjuvant therapy and prior to rectal cancer resection in a NAPRC-certified rectal cancer centre between 2016 and 2021. The study compared findings of preoperative, post-neoadjuvant MRI with final pathology relative to T stage, N stage, tumour size, and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were included in the study. We found fair concordance (kappa -0.316) for T stage between restaging MRI and pathology report, and slight concordance for N stage and CRM status (kappa -0.11, kappa = 0.089, respectively). Concordance rates were lower for patients following total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) or with a low rectal tumour. In total, 73% of patients with positive N pathology status had negative N status in the restaging MRI. Sensitivity and specificity regarding positive CRM in post-neoadjuvant treatment MRI were 45.45% and 70.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We found low concordance levels between restaging MRI and pathology regarding TN stage and CRM status. Concordance levels were even lower for patients after TNT regimen and with a low rectal tumour. In the era of TNT and watch-and-wait approach, we should not rely solely on restaging MRI to make post-neoadjuvant treatment decisions.

Delayed TME Surgery in a Watch-and-Wait Strategy After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: An Analysis of Hospital Costs and Surgical and Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

A watch-and-wait strategy for patients with rectal cancer with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a valuable alternative for rectal resection. However, there are patients who will have residual tumor or regrowth during watch and wait.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate safety and costs for patients who underwent delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a large teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

Between January 2015 and May 2020, 622 new rectal cancer patients were seen, of whom 200 received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ninety-four patients were included, 65 of whom underwent immediate surgery and 29 of whom required delayed surgery after an initial watch-and-wait approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures included 30-day postoperative morbidity rate, hospital costs. 2-year overall and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

There was no difference in length of stay (9 vs 8; p = 0.83), readmissions (27.6% vs 10.0%; p = 0.10), surgical re-interventions (15.0% vs 3.4%; p = 0.16), or stoma-free rate (52.6% vs 31.0%; p = 0.09) between immediate and delayed surgery groups. Hospital costs were similar in the delayed group (€11,913 vs €13,769; p = 0.89). Two-year overall survival (93% vs 100%; p = 0.23) and disease-free survival (78% vs 81%; p = 0.47) rates were comparable.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included small sample size, follow-up time and retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Delayed surgery for regrowth in a watch-and-wait program or for persistent residual disease after a repeated assessment is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity or a significant rise in costs compared to immediate total mesorectal excision. There also appears to be no evident compromise in oncological outcome. Repeated response assessment in patients with a near complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a useful approach to identify more patients who can benefit from a watch-and-wait strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B836 .

CIRUGA DE TME RETRASADA EN UNA ESTRATEGIA DE WATCH AND WAIT DESPUS DE LA QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE PARA CNCER DE RECTO UN ANLISIS DE COSTOS HOSPITALARIOS, Y DE RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS Y ONCOLGICOS

ANTECEDENTES: Una estrategia de Watch and Wait para pacientes con cáncer de recto con una respuesta clínica completa después de quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante es una alternativa valiosa en vez de resección rectal. Sin embargo, hay pacientes que tendrán tumor residual o un recrecimiento durante el Watch and Wait .OBJETIVO: El objetivo fue investigar la seguridad y los costos para los pacientes que se sometieron a una cirugía diferida después de la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante.DISEÑO: Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo con datos recolectados prospectivamente.AJUSTE: El estudio se llevó a cabo en un gran hospital universitario.PACIENTES: Entre enero de 2015 y mayo de 2020, se atendieron 622 nuevos pacientes con cáncer de recto, de los cuales 200 recibieron quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante. Se incluyeron 94 pacientes, de los cuales 65 se sometieron a cirugía inmediata y 29 pacientes requirieron cirugía diferida después de un enfoque inicial de observación y espera.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: se incluyeron la tasa de morbilidad posoperatoria a 30 días, los costos hospitalarios y las sobrevidas general y libre de enfermedad a dos años.RESULTADOS: No hubo diferencia en la duración de la estancia (9 vs 8, p = 0,83), reingresos (27,6% vs 10,0%, p = 0,10), reintervenciones quirúrgicas (15,0% vs 3,4%, p = 0,16) y tasa libre de estoma (52,6% vs 31,0%, p = 0,09) entre los grupos de cirugía inmediata y tardía. Los costos hospitalarios fueron similares en el grupo retrasado (11913 € frente a 13769 €, p = 0,89). Las tasas de sobrevida general a dos años (93% frente a 100%, p = 0,23) y sobrevida libre de enfermedad (78% frente a 81%, p = 0,47) fueron comparables.LIMITACIONES: Tamaño de muestra pequeño, tiempo de seguimiento y diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN: La cirugía tardía para el recrecimiento en un programa de Watch and Wait o para la enfermedad residual persistente después de una evaluación repetida no se asocia con un riesgo mayor de morbilidad posoperatoria ni con un aumento significativo en los costos, en comparación con la escisión total de mesorrecto inmediata. Tampoco parece haber un compromiso evidente en el resultado oncológico. La evaluación repetida de la respuesta en pacientes con una respuesta clínica casi completa después de la quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante es un enfoque útil para identificar más pacientes que pueden beneficiarse de una estrategia de Watch and Wait . Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B836 . (Traducción-Dr. Juan Carlos Reyes ).

Improved response rate in patients with prognostically poor locally advanced rectal cancer after treatment with induction chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy when compared with chemoradiotherapy alone: A matched case-control study

INTRODUCTION

The addition of induction chemotherapy (ICT) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has the potential to improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, patient selection is essential to prevent overtreatment. This study compared the complete response (CR) rate after treatment with and without ICT of LARC patients with prognostically poor characteristics.

METHODS

All LARC patients who were treated with neoadjuvant CRT, whether or not preceded by ICT, and who underwent surgery or were considered for a wait-and-see strategy between January 2016 and March 2020 in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, were retrospectively selected. LARC was defined as any T4 tumour, or a T2/T3 tumour with extramural venous invasion and/or tumour deposits and/or N2 lymph node status, and/or mesorectal fascia involvement (T3 tumours only). Case-control matching was performed based on the aforementioned characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients, 178 (74%) received CRT (CRT-group) and 64 patients (26%) received ICT followed by CRT (ICT-group). In the ICT-group, 3 patients (5%) did not receive the minimum of three cycles. In addition, in this selected cohort, compliance with radiotherapy was 100% in the ICT-group and 97% in the CRT-group. The CR rate was 30% in the ICT-group and 15% in the CRT-group (p = 0.011). After case-control matching, the CR rate was 28% and 9%, respectively (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Treatment including ICT seemed well tolerated and resulted in a high CR rate. Hence, this treatment strategy may facilitate organ preservation and improve survival in LARC patients with prognostically poor characteristics.

Persistent High Rate of Positive Margins and Postoperative Complications After Surgery for cT4 Rectal Cancer at a National Level

BACKGROUND

A more extensive resection is often required in locally advanced rectal cancer, depending on preoperative neoadjuvant treatment response.

OBJECTIVE

Circumferential margin involvement and postoperative outcomes after total mesorectal excision and multivisceral resection were assessed in patients with clinical locally advanced (cT4) rectal cancer at a national level.

DESIGN

This is a population-based study.

SETTINGS

Data were retrieved from the Dutch Colorectal Audit.

PATIENTS

A total of 2242 of 2881 patients with cT4 rectal cancer between January 2009 and December 2017 were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Main outcomes were resection margins, postoperative complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

Multivisceral resection was performed in 936 of 2242 patients, of whom 629 underwent extended multivisceral resection. Positive circumferential margin rate was higher after multivisceral resection than after total mesorectal excision: 21.2% vs 13.9% (p < 0.001). More postoperative complications occurred after limited and extended multivisceral resections than after total mesorectal excision (44.1% and 53.8% vs 37.6%, p < 0.001). Incidence of 30-day mortality was similarly low in both groups (1.5% vs 2.2%, p = 0.20). Independent predictors of postoperative complications were age ≥70 years (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.04-1.56]; p = 0.02), male sex (OR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.38-2.04]; p< 0.001), mucinous tumors (OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.06-2.27]; p = 0.02), extended multivisceral resection (OR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.56-2.52]; p< 0.001), Hartmann procedure (OR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.07-1.90]; p = 0.02), and abdominoperineal resection (OR, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.25-1.96]; p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Data specifying the extent of multivisceral resections and Clavien Dindo I to II complications were not available.

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based study revealed relatively high circumferential margin positivity and postoperative complication rates in patients with cT4 rectal cancer, especially after multivisceral resections, but low mortality rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B457.

ALTA TASA PERSISTENTE DE MRGENES POSITIVOS Y COMPLICACIONES POSTOPERATORIAS DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER RECTAL CTA NIVEL NACIONAL

ANTECEDENTES:A menudo se requiere una resección más extensa en el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, según la respuesta al tratamiento neoadyuvante preoperatorio.OBJETIVO:Se evaluó la afectación del margen circunferencial y los resultados postoperatorios después de la escisión mesorrectal total y la resección multivisceral en pacientes con cáncer rectal clínico localmente avanzado (cT4) a nivel nacional.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio poblacional.ENTORNO CLINICO:Los datos se recuperaron de la Auditoría colorrectal holandesa.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron un total de 2242 de 2881 pacientes con cáncer de recto cT4 entre enero de 2009 y diciembre de 2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Los principales resultados fueron los márgenes de resección, las complicaciones postoperatorias y la mortalidad.RESULTADOS:Se realizó resección multivisceral en 936 de 2242 pacientes, de los cuales 629 fueron sometidos a resección multivisceral extendida. La tasa de margen circunferencial positivo fue mayor después de la resección multivisceral que después de la escisión mesorrectal total: 21,2% versus a 13,9% (p <0,001). Se produjeron más complicaciones postoperatorias después de resecciones multiviscerales limitadas y extendidas en comparación con la escisión mesorrectal total (44,1% y 53,8% versus a 37,6%, p <0,001). La incidencia de mortalidad a 30 días fue igualmente baja en ambos grupos (1,5% versus a 2,2%, p = 0,20). Los predictores independientes de complicaciones posoperatorias fueron la edad ≥70 años (OR = 1,28, IC del 95% [1,04 a 1,56], p = 0,02), hombres (OR = 1,68, IC del 95% [1,38 a 2,04], p <0,001), tumores mucinosos (OR = 1,55, IC del 95% [1,06 a 2,27], p = 0,02), resección multivisceral extendida (OR = 1,98, IC del 95% [1,56 a 2,52], p <0,001), Hartmann (OR = 1,42, 95% Cl [1,07 a 1,90], p = 0,02) y resección abdominoperineal (OR 1,56, Cl 95% [1,25 a 1,96], p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:No se disponía de datos que especificaran el alcance de las resecciones multiviscerales y las complicaciones de Clavien Dindo I-II.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio poblacional reveló tasas de complicaciones postoperatorias y positividad del margen circunferencial relativamente altas en pacientes con cáncer de recto cT4, especialmente después de resecciones multiviscerales, pero tasas de mortalidad bajas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B457.

Impact of interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Epidemiologically, in China, locally advanced rectal cancer is a more common form of rectal cancer. Preoperative neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy can effectively reduce the size of locally invasive tumors and improve disease-free survival (DFS) and pathologic response after surgery. At present, this modality has become the standard protocol for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer in many centers, but the optimal time for surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is still controversial.

AIM

To investigate the impact of time interval between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery on DFS and pathologic response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 231 patients who were classified as having clinical stage II or III advanced rectal cancer and underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery at the National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College from November 2014 to August 2017 were involved in this retrospective cohort study. The patients were divided into two groups based on the different time intervals between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery: 139 (60.2%) patients were in group A (≤ 9 wk), and 92 (39.2%) patients were in group B (> 9 wk). DFS and pathologic response were analyzed as the primary endpoints. The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications and sphincter preservation.

RESULTS

For the 231 patients included, surgery was performed at ≤ 9 wk in 139 (60.2%) patients and at > 9 wk in 92 (39.8%). The patients’ clinical characteristics, surgical results, and tumor outcomes were analyzed through univariate analysis combined with multivariate regression analysis. The overall pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 27.2% (n = 25) in the longer time interval group (> 9 wk) and 10.8% (n = 15) in the shorter time interval group (≤ 9 wk, P = 0.001). The postoperative complications did not differ between the groups (group A, 5% vs group B, 5.4%; P = 0.894). Surgical procedures for sphincter preservation were performed in 113 (48.9%) patients, which were not significantly different between the groups (group A, 52.5% vs group B, 43.5%; P = 0.179). The pCR rate was an independent factor affected by time interval (P = 0.009; odds ratio [OR] = 2.668; 95%CI: 1.276-5.578). Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression analysis showed that the longer time interval (> 9 wk) was a significant independent prognostic factor for DFS (P = 0.032; OR = 2.295; 95%CI: 1.074-4.905), but the time interval was not an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A longer time interval to surgery after neoadjuvant therapy may improve the pCR rate and DFS but has little impact on postoperative complications and sphincter preservation.

Randomized controlled trial of 8 weeks' vs 12 weeks' interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer

AIM

The aim was to compare the pathological complete response (pCR) rate at 8 compared to 12 weeks' interval between completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and surgery in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHOD

This was a randomized trial which included a total of 330 patients from two institutions. Patients with locally advanced (T3-4N0M0, TxN+M0) rectal cancer were randomized into 8- and 12-week interval groups. All the patients received long-course CRT (45 Gy in 1.8 Gy fractions and concomitant oral capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil infusion). Surgery was performed at either 8 or 12 weeks after CRT. The primary end-point was pCR. Secondary end-points were sphincter preservation, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and fifty-two patients (n = 125 in the 8-week group, n = 127 in the 12-week group) were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. The overall pCR rate was 17.9% (n = 45): 12% (n = 15) in the 8-week group and 23.6% (n = 30) in the 12-week group (P = 0.021). Sphincter-preserving surgery was performed in 107 (85.6%) patients which was significantly higher than the 94 (74%) patients in the 12-week group (P = 0.016). Postoperative mortality was seen in three (1.2%) patients overall and was not different between groups (1.6% in 8 weeks vs 0.8% in 12 weeks, P = 0.494). Groups were similar in anastomotic leak (10.8% in 8 weeks vs 4.5% in 12 weeks, P = 0.088) and morbidity (30.4% in 8 weeks and 20.1% in 12 weeks, P = 0.083).

CONCLUSION

Extending the interval between CRT and surgery from 8 to 12 weeks resulted in a 2-fold increase in pCR rate without any difference in mortality and morbidity.

Gastrointestinal Malignancies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Triage to Surgery

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread cancelation of electively scheduled surgeries, including for colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. The American College of Surgeons and the Society of Surgical Oncology have released guidelines for triage of these procedures. We seek to synthesize available evidence on delayed resection and oncologic outcomes, while also providing a critical assessment of the released guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify literature between 2005 and 2020 investigating the impact of time to surgery on oncologic outcomes in colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer.

RESULTS

For colorectal cancer, 1066 abstracts were screened and 43 papers were included. In primarily resected colon cancer, delay over 30 to 40 days is associated with lower survival. In rectal cancer, time to surgery over 7 to 8 weeks following neoadjuvant therapy is associated with decreased survival. Three hundred ninety-four abstracts were screened for pancreatic cancer and nine studies were included. Two studies demonstrate increased unexpected progression with delayed surgery over 30 days. Out of 633 abstracts screened for gastric cancer, six studies were included. No identified study demonstrated worse survival with increased time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

Moderate evidence suggests that delayed resection of colorectal cancer worsens survival; the impact of time to surgery on gastric and pancreatic cancer outcomes is uncertain. Early resection of gastrointestinal malignancies provides the best chance for curative therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of procedures should account for available evidence on time to surgery and oncologic outcomes.

[Assessment of individualized treatment of rectal carcinoma]

Individualized and tailored treatment plays a crucial role in the rating of special operation techniques or certain treatment strategies following defined quality criteria and indicators. Deviations from clearly defined recommendations in guidelines must therefore be justified, documented and evaluated as precisely as possible. The aim of this leading article is to examine the individualized treatment of rectal cancer based on existing evidence and to discuss its role in the light of routinely used treatment algorithms. In addition to a web-based literature search the current German national S3 guidelines on colorectal cancer were also included. In the treatment of cancer in the middle and lower third of the rectum, individual, patient and tumor-related parameters are of decisive importance from the pretreatment stage to the actual surgery up to aftercare and adjuvant therapy to enable interdisciplinary decision making for optimal treatment.