Which Definition of Upper Rectal Cancer Is Optimal in Selecting Stage II or III Rectal Cancer Patients to Avoid Postoperative Adjuvant Radiation?

Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: How to Select the Most Suitable?

Rectal cancer shows specific characteristics in terms of pattern of recurrence, which occurs commonly at both local and distant sites. The standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) including neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery based on the total mesorectal excision principles leads to a reduction in the rates of local recurrences to 6-7% at 5 years. However, the outcomes among those with high-risk lesions remain unsatisfactory. On the contrary, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy results in long-term morbidities among those with low-risk lesions. Furthermore, the overall survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy is still a subject to be debated, except for patients with complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a new paradigm of management of high-risk rectal cancer that includes early administration of the most effective systemic therapy either before or after neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy prior to surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy. TNT potentially improves disease-free survival, even though whether it can prolong survival has been debatable. Recently, neoadjuvant chemotherapy only has been proved to be non-inferior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with low-risk lesions. This review intends to review the current evidences of neoadjuvant therapy and propose a more customized paradigm of management of LARC.

Is radiotherapy necessary for upper rectal cancer underwent curative resection? A retrospective study of 363 patients

BACKGROUND

To investigate the impact of radiotherapy (RT) on recurrence and survival in patients with locally advanced upper rectal cancer underwent curative resection.

METHODS

363 locally advanced upper rectal cancer cases were identified from the database of our hospital from 2010 to 2018. All patients underwent curative resection and had the lower margin of the tumor located 10-15 cm from the anal verge, among them, 69 patients received pre- or post-operative radiotherapy and 294 patients without. Local control and survivals were compared, and stratification grouping based on European Society for Medical Oncology risk factors were further compared. 1:2 propensity score matching analysis was used to reduce the impact of confounding factors.

RESULTS

There were 207 patients after 1:2 matching (RT group:non-RT group = 69:138). The 5-year overall survival (OS) of the RT group and non-RT group after matching was 84.1% and 80.9%, respectively(P = 0.440); the 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 96.5% and 94.7%, respectively(P = 0.364); the 5-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was 76.8% and 76.9%, respectively(P = 0.531). Subgroup analysis showed that radiotherapy could not significantly improve the overall survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis with or without poor prognostic features. In the high-risk subgroup, the 5-year OS was 76.9% and 79.6% for patients treated with radiotherapy and without (P = 0.798), LRFS was 94.8% and 94.2%, respectively (P = 0.605), DMFS 68.7% and 74.7%, respectively (P = 0.233).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that radiotherapy could not improve local control and survival for locally advanced upper rectal cancer patients underwent curative resection, even in the cases with poor prognostic features.

Determination of the positional relationship of the second Houston valve and peritoneal reflection using computed tomographic colonography and magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE

The second Houston valve is used as a surrogate for estimating the position of the peritoneal reflection; however, the concordance between the positions of the valve and peritoneal reflection has not been investigated. This study aimed to clarify this positional relationship.

METHODS

The second Houston valve and peritoneal reflection positions were assessed using tomographic colonography and magnetic resonance imaging. In total, 117 patients were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

The positions of the second Houston valve and peritoneal reflection were nearly concordant, although the space between them ranged from - 20.7 to 33.9 mm. A peritoneal reflection located further from the anal verge than the second Houston valve was defined as a shallow peritoneal reflection. Male sex, high body weight, and a high body mass index were significantly correlated with a shallower peritoneal reflection, as determined by a univariate analysis (sex: P = 0.0138, weight: P = 0.0097, body mass index: P = 0.0311). A multivariate analysis revealed a significantly shallower peritoneal reflection in males than in females (odds ratio: 2.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-6.56, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The second Houston valve located near the peritoneal reflection can be a useful surrogate marker for estimating its position. In relatively heavy males, the peritoneal reflection is located more cranially than the second Houston valve.