Nonoperative management of rectal cancer with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Surg. 2012;256:965-972. [PMID: 23154394 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3182759f1c]

Limited accuracy of DCE-MRI in identification of pathological complete responders after chemoradiotherapy treatment for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether post-chemoradiotherapy (CRT) DCE-MRI can identify rectal cancer patients with pathologic complete response (pCR).

METHODS

From a rectal cancer surgery database 2007-2014, 61 consecutive patients that met the following inclusion criteria were selected for analysis: (1) stage II/III primary rectal adenocarcinoma; (2) received CRT; (3) underwent surgery (4); underwent rectal DCE-MRI on a 1.5-T MRI scanner. Two experienced radiologists, in consensus, drew regions of interest (ROI) on the sagittal DCE-MRI image in the tumour bed. These were exported from ImageJ to in-house Matlab code for modelling using the Tofts model. K ^trans, K _ep and v _e values were compared to pathological response.

RESULTS

Of the 61 initial patients, 37 had data considered adequate for fitting to obtain perfusion parameters. Among the 13 men and 24 women, median age 53 years, there were 8 pCR (22 %). K ^trans could not distinguish patients with pCR. For patients with 90 % or greater response, mean K ^trans and K _ep values were statistically significant (p = 0.032 and 0.027, respectively). Using a cutoff value of K ^trans = 0.25 min^-1, the AUC was 0.71.

CONCLUSION

K ^trans could be used to identify patients with 90 % or more response to chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer with an AUC of 0.7.

KEY POINTS

• Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer causes decreased blood flow and permeability in the tumour bed. • Lower values of blood flow and permeability correlate with good tumour response. • K ^trans of 0.25min ^-1 best identifies patients with ≥90 % response with AUC 0.71.

Prospective Validation of a Low Rectal Cancer Magnetic Resonance Imaging Staging System and Development of a Local Recurrence Risk Stratification Model: The MERCURY II Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to validate a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging classification that preoperatively assessed the relationship between tumor and the low rectal cancer surgical resection plane (mrLRP).

BACKGROUND

Low rectal cancer oncological outcomes remain a global challenge, evidenced by high pathological circumferential resection margin (pCRM) rates and unacceptable variations in permanent colostomies.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2012, a prospective, observational, multicenter study (MERCURY II) recruited 279 patients with adenocarcinoma 6 cm or less from the anal verge. MRI assessed the following: mrLRP "safe or unsafe," venous invasion (mrEMVI), depth of spread, node status, tumor height, and tumor quadrant. MRI-based treatment recommendations were compared against final management and pCRM outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall pCRM involvement was 9.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.9-12.3], significantly lower than previously reported rates of 30%. Patients with no adverse MRI features and a "safe" mrLRP underwent sphincter-preserving surgery without preoperative radiotherapy, resulting in a 1.6% pCRM rate. The pCRM rate increased 5-fold for an "unsafe" compared with "safe" preoperative mrLRP [odds ratio (OR) = 5.5; 95% CI, 2.3-13.3)]. Posttreatment MRI reassessment indicated a "safe" ymrLRP in 33 of 113 (29.2%), none of whom had ypCRM involvement. In contrast, persistent "unsafe" ymrLRP posttherapy resulted in 17.5% ypCRM involvement. Further independent MRI assessed risk factors were EMVI (OR = 3.8; 95% CI, 1.5-9.6), tumors less than 4.0 cm from the anal verge (OR = 3.4; 95% CI, 1.3-8.8), and anterior tumors (OR = 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-6.8).

CONCLUSIONS

The study validated MRI low rectal plane assessment, reducing pCRM involvement and avoiding overtreatment through selective preoperative therapy and rationalized use of permanent colostomy. It also highlights the importance of posttreatment restaging.

Good and complete responding locally advanced rectal tumors after chemoradiotherapy: where are the residual positive nodes located on restaging MRI?

PURPOSE

Aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution of persistent mesorectal lymph node metastases on restaging MRI in patients with a good or complete response of their primary tumor (ypT0-2) after CRT for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty eight locally advanced rectal cancer patients underwent CRT, which resulted in a good response (downstaging to yT0-2) in 144 patients. Forty-nine patients were excluded (no surgery/insufficient follow-up or lacking lesion-by-lesion histology results). This resulted in a final study group of 95 yT0-2 patients. For the patients with a yN(+)-status, a detailed lesion-by-lesion comparison between restaging MRI and histology was performed to evaluate the characteristics and distribution of the individual N(+)-nodes.

RESULTS

7/95 patients (7%) had a yT0-2N(+) status (11/880 (1%) N(+) nodes): no N(+) were found below the tumor level, 55% of the N(+) nodes were located at the level of the tumor, and 45% proximal to the tumor (at a median distance of 1.4 cm above the tumor level). In axial plane, 82% of the nodes were located at the ipsilateral circumference of the tumor, at a median distance of 0.9 cm from the tumor/rectal wall.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of persistent metastatic mesorectal nodes after CRT in patients with a good tumor response after CRT is very low. No N(+) nodes are found below the tumor level. All N(+) nodes are located at the level of or proximal to the primary tumor, of which the majority very close to the tumor/lumen.

The Immunogenicity of Colorectal Cancer in Relation to Tumor Development and Treatment

Although most cancer types have been viewed as immunologically silent until recently, it has become increasingly clear that the immune system plays key roles in the course of tumor development. Remarkable progress towards understanding cancer immunogenicity and tumor-immune system interactions has revealed important implications for the design of novel immune-based therapies. Natural immune responses, but also therapeutic interventions, can modulate the tumor phenotype due to selective outgrowth of resistant subtypes. This is the result of heterogeneity of tumors, with genetic instability as a driving force, and obviously changes the immunogenicity of tumors. In this review, we discuss the immunogenicity of colorectal cancer (CRC) in relation to tumor development and treatment. As most tumors, CRC activates the immune system in various ways, and is also capable of escaping recognition and elimination by the immune system. Tumor-immune system interactions underlie the balance between immune control and immune escape, and may differ in primary tumors, in the circulation, and in liver metastases of CRC. Since CRC immunogenicity varies between tumors and individuals, novel immune-based therapeutic strategies should not only anticipate the molecular profile, but also the immunological profile of a specific tumor.

Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Cancer: Can We Detect It? Lessons Learned From a Proposed Randomized Trial of Watch-and-Wait Treatment of Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemoradiotherapy has the potential to downsize and downstage tumors before surgery, decrease locoregional recurrence, and induce a complete sterilization of tumor cells for middle and low locally advanced rectal cancer. A watch-and-wait tactic has been proposed for patients with clinical complete response.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to verify our ability to identify complete clinical response in patients with rectal cancer based on clinical and radiologic criteria.

DESIGN

This was a prospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single institution, in the setting of a watch-and-wait randomized trial.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with stage T3 to T4N0M0 or T(any)N+M0 cancer located within 10 cm from anal verge or T2N0 within 7 cm from anal verge were included in the study. Patients were staged and restaged 8 weeks after completion of chemoradiation (5-fluorouracil, 5040 cGy) by digital examination, colonoscopy, pelvic MRI, and thorax and abdominal CT scans.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical and radiologic judgments of tumor response were compared with pathologic response of patients treated by total mesorectal excision or clinical follow-up of patients selected for nonoperative treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 118 patients were treated. Six patients were considered clinic complete responders (2 randomly assigned for surgery (1 ypT0N0 and 1 ypT2N0) and 4 patients randomly assigned for observation (3 sustained clinic complete response and 1 had tumor regrowth)). The 112 clinic incomplete responders underwent total mesorectal excision, and 18 revealed pathologic complete response. These 18 patients were not considered complete responders at restaging because they presented at least 1 of the following conditions: mucosal ulceration and/or deformity and/or substenosis of rectal lumen at digital rectal examination and colonoscopy (n = 16), ymrT1 to T4 (n = 16), ymrN+ (n = 2), involvement of circumferential resection margin on MRI (n = 3), extramural vascular invasion on MRI (n = 4), MRI tumor response grade 2 to 4 (n = 15), and pelvic side wall lymph node involvement on MRI (n = 1). Sensitivity for identification of ypT0N0 or sustained clinic complete response was 18.2%.

LIMITATIONS

This study has a short follow-up and small sample size. Radiologists who reviewed the restaging examination were not blinded to the pretreatment stage. Only 1 radiologist read the images of each patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of clinic complete response according to current adopted criteria has low sensitivity because pathologic complete response more frequently presented as clinic incomplete response (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A221).

Impact of Organ-Preserving Strategies on Anorectal Function in Patients with Distal Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Organ-preserving strategies have been considered for patients with distal rectal cancer and complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation to avoid the functional consequences of radical surgery. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and no immediate surgery (watch and wait) have been considered in selected patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare anorectal function following these 2 organ-preserving strategies (transanal endoscopic microsurgery and watch and wait) for rectal cancer with complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

DESIGN

This study is based on the comparison of prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a single center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation (50.4-54 Gy and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were prospectively studied. Patients with complete clinical response were managed by watch and wait. Patients with near-complete response (≤3 cm, ycT1-2N0) were managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Functional outcomes were determined by anorectal manometry and Fecal Incontinence Index and Quality of Life assessment.

RESULTS

Two groups of patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients with near-complete response undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery and 53 with complete response after watch and wait were assessed. Baseline features were similar between groups. Patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery had worse resting/squeeze pressures (p = 0.004) and rectal capacity (p = 0.002). In addition, their incontinence scores (2.3 vs. 6.5; p < 0.001) and quality-of-life questionnaire responses (in all domains; p ≤ 0.01) were significantly worse in comparison with patients undergoing watch and wait.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of baseline anorectal function information.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative management of patients with complete clinical response following chemoradiation results in better anorectal function in comparison with patients with near-complete response managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. In the absence of clinically detectable residual cancer, this latter approach may result in significant worsening of anorectal function.

KRAS and Combined KRAS/TP53 Mutations in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer are Independently Associated with Decreased Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy

BACKGROUND

The response of rectal cancers to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) is variable, but tools to predict response remain lacking. We evaluated whether KRAS and TP53 mutations are associated with pathologic complete response (pCR) and lymph node metastasis after adjusting for neoadjuvant regimen.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 229 pretreatment biopsies from patients with stage II/III rectal cancer was performed. All patients received CRT. Patients received 0-8 cycles of FOLFOX either before or after CRT, but prior to surgical excision. A subset was analyzed to assess concordance between mutation calls by Sanger Sequencing and a next-generation assay.

RESULTS

A total of 96 tumors (42 %) had KRAS mutation, 150 had TP53 mutation (66 %), and 59 (26 %) had both. Following neoadjuvant therapy, 59 patients (26 %) achieved pCR. Of 133 KRAS wild-type tumors, 45 (34 %) had pCR, compared with 14 of 96 (15 %) KRAS mutant tumors (p = .001). KRAS mutation remained independently associated with a lower pCR rate on multivariable analysis after adjusting for clinical stage, CRT-to-surgery interval and cycles of FOLFOX (OR 0.34; 95 % CI 0.17-0.66, p < .01). Of 29 patients with KRAS G12V or G13D, only 2 (7 %) achieved pCR. Tumors with both KRAS and TP53 mutation were associated with lymph node metastasis. The concordance between platforms was high for KRAS (40 of 43, 93 %).

CONCLUSIONS

KRAS mutation is independently associated with a lower pCR rate in locally advanced rectal cancer after adjusting for variations in neoadjuvant regimen. Genomic data can potentially be used to select patients for "watch and wait" strategies.

Locally advanced rectal cancer: Preliminary results of rectal preservation after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision. However, organ preservation has been proposed for tumors with good response to neoadjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oncologic results of this strategy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study (2005-2014) including a consecutive series of patients with rectal adenocarcinoma with complete or almost complete clinical response after preoperative chemo-radiotherapy, that were treated according to a strategy of preservation of the rectum.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients with rectal cancer received neoadjuvant therapy. Thirty (14.7%) had a good response and were treated with rectal preservation (23 «Watch and Wait» and 7 local resections). Median follow-up was 46 months (interquartile range: 30-68). In the group of «Watch & Wait», 4 patients had local recurrence before 12 months (actuarial local recurrence rate=18.5%). All of them underwent salvage surgery (2 with radical surgery and 2 local resections) without any further recurrence. Disease-free survival actuarial rate at 3 years follow-up was 94.1% (95% CI 82.9-100). None of the 7 patients that were treated by local excision had local recurrence. The organ preservation rate for the whole group was 93%.

CONCLUSION

The strategy of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancer is feasible in cases with good response to neoadjuvant therapy. When implemented in a highly selected group of patients this strategy is associated with satisfactory oncologic results.

Consolidation chemotherapy during neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) for distal rectal cancer leads to sustained decrease in tumor metabolism when compared to standard CRT regimen

Background

Neoadjuvant CRT may lead to significant tumor regression in patients with rectal cancer. Different CRT regimens with consolidation chemotherapy may lead to increased rates of complete tumor regression. The purpose of this study was to understand tumor metabolic activity following two different neoadjuvant CRT regimens using sequential PET/CT imaging in two different intervals following RT.

Methods

Patients with cT2-4 N0-2 M0 rectal cancer treated by standard CRT (54Gy and 2 cycles of 5FU-based chemotherapy) or extended CRT (54Gy and 6 cycles of 5FU-based chemotherapy) underwent sequential PET/CT imaging at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 weeks from radiation completion.

Results

99 patients undergoing standard CRT were compared to 12 patients undergoing CRT with consolidation chemotherapy. Patients treated with consolidation CRT had increased rates of complete clinical or pathological response (66 % vs. 23 %; p < 0.001). SUVmax variation between baseline and 6 weeks (88 % vs. 63 %; p < 0.001) and between baseline and 12 weeks (90 % vs. 57 %; p < 0.001) were significantly more pronounced among patients undergoing extended CRT with consolidation chemotherapy. An increase in SUVmax between 6 and 12 weeks was observed in 51 % of patients undergoing standard and 18 % of patients undergoing consolidation CRT (p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Most of the reduction in tumor metabolism after neoadjuvant CRT occurs within the first 6 weeks from RT completion. In patients undergoing CRT with consolidation chemotherapy, tumors are less likely to regain metabolic activity between 6 and 12 weeks. Therefore, assessment of tumor response may be safely postponed to 12 weeks in patients undergoing extended CRT with consolidation chemotherapy.

Trial registration

NCT00254683

Current topics in the multimodality treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

The multimodality approach to the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer has evolved to include neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy, total mesorectal excision and adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Though this broad strategy has yielded improvements in local control compared with historical data, overall survival remains largely unchanged. Current investigations focus on improving patient selection through new imaging modalities, improving surgical techniques, incorporating more aggressive systemic treatment regimens and the selective use of radiation. Here, we review emerging data regarding newer staging techniques, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, optimal timing of surgery, selective use of radiation and nonoperative approaches to the management of locally advanced rectal cancers.

Definitive Chemoradiotherapy ("Watch-and-Wait" Approach)

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision has been the standard of care for locally advanced patients with rectal cancer. Some patients achieve a pathologic complete response (pCR) to CRT and the oncologic outcomes are particularly favorable in this group. The role of surgery in patients with a pCR is now being questioned as radical rectal resection is associated with significant morbidity and long-term effects on quality of life. In an attempt to better tailor therapy, there is an interest in a "watch-and-wait" approach in patients who have a clinical complete response (cCR) after CRT with the goal of omitting surgery and allowing for organ preservation. However, a cCR does not always indicate a pCR, and improved clinical and imaging modalities are needed to better predict which patients have achieved a pCR and therefore can safely undergo a "watch-and-wait" approach. This article reviews the current data on nonoperative management and on-going controversies associated with this approach.

Rectal cancer with complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, surgery, or "watch and wait"

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients treated with chemoradiotherapy with a complete clinical response followed by either a "watch and wait" strategy or a total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

This was an observational retrospective study from a single institute. Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer following chemoradiotherapy with a complete clinical response from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2014 were included.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 18 patients who opted for a "watch and wait" policy and 26 patients who underwent radical surgery after achieving a complete clinical response. Patients had no documented treatment complications under the watch and wait policy, while 13 patients who underwent radical surgery experienced significant morbidity. There were two local recurrences in the watch and wait group; both were treated with salvage resection and had no associated mortality. In the radical surgery group, 1 patient showed an incomplete pathologic response (ypT0N1), and the remaining 25 patients showed complete pathologic responses; 1 had a distant recurrence, which was managed non-operatively, and 2 patients died of unrelated causes. The 5-year overall survival rate and median disease-free survival time were 100% and 69.78 months in the watch and wait group and 92.30% and 89.04 months in the radical surgery group.

CONCLUSIONS

A watch and wait policy avoids the morbidity associated with radical surgery and preserves oncologic outcomes in our retrospective study from a single institute. It could be considered a therapeutic option in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer following chemoradiotherapy with a complete clinical response.

Complete radiotherapy response in rectal cancer: A review of the evidence

Complete response to chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer is becoming a common clinical entity. Techniques to diagnose complete response and how to survey these patients without operative intervention are still unclear. We review the most recent evidence. Barriers to firm conclusions regarding this are heterogeneity of diagnostic definitions, differing surveillance protocols, and a lack of randomised studies.

Update on advances and controversy in rectal cancer treatment

Changes in the multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer have been recently proposed. We performed a comprehensive review of the current data on neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment of rectal cancer, focussing on chemoradiotherapy treatment and timing of surgery. Six components were proposed as the framework for the treatment of rectal cancer: neoadjuvant therapy and changing patterns in patient selection, long- or short-course radiotherapy, adverse effects of radiotherapy, timing of surgery, non-operative management of rectal cancer and postoperative adjuvant therapy. Lack of a consistent difference in terms of local recurrence has been observed between short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy. Indications for preoperative radiotherapy have been reconsidered in the last years. An interval of 10-11 weeks seemed to be the optimal timing, with no impact on patient safety. Since assessment criteria of clinical complete response are not well defined, and the basis for non-operative management of rectal cancer is still not clear, further investigations are required. There is controversy about standard treatments for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer that are being analyzed by ongoing studies. Tailored treatments could avoid over-treatment for a large number of patients without any impairment of the oncologic results.

Multimodal Rectal Cancer Treatment: In Some Cases, Less May Be More

A series of clinical trials in the last several decades has resulted in the development of multimodality treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer that includes neoadjuvant (preoperative) chemoradiotherapy, total mesorectal excision, and postoperative adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Owing to this regimen, patients with locally advanced rectal cancer have better survival rates than patients with colon cancer, but at the cost of substantial morbidity and reduced quality of life. The challenge is to identify treatment approaches that maintain or even improve oncologic outcomes while preserving quality of life. We have identified different tumor characteristics that are associated with recurrence and probability of survival for locally advanced rectal cancer. This risk stratification, based on baseline clinical staging and tumor response to chemoradiotherapy, has led us to question whether all patients with locally advanced rectal cancer require every component of the multimodal regimen. In this article, we will review recent evidence that some patients with locally advanced rectal cancer can be spared one or more treatment modalities without compromising long-term oncologic outcomes and while preserving quality of life.

NPTX2 is associated with neoadjuvant therapy response in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) is recommended for locally advanced rectal cancer. Tumor response varies from pathologic complete response (pCR) to no tumor regression. The mechanisms behind CRT resistance remain undefined. In our previously generated complementary DNA microarrays of pretreatment biopsies from rectal cancer patients, neuronal pentraxin 2 (NPTX2) expression discriminated patients with pCR from those with residual tumor. As tumor response is prognostic for survival, we sought to evaluate the clinical relevance of NPTX2 in rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction was used to evaluate NPTX2 messenger RNA expression in individual rectal cancers before CRT. Tumors with NPTX2 expression <50% of normal rectum were defined as NPTX2-low and those with >50% were defined as NPTX2-high. NPTX2 levels were compared to response to therapy and oncologic outcomes using Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, chi-square, and Mantel-Cox (log-rank) tests, as appropriate.

RESULTS

Rectal cancers from 40 patients were included. The mean patient age was 56.8 years, and 30% were female. pCR was achieved in eight of 40 patients (20%). In these patients, messenger RNA NPTX2 levels were significantly decreased compared to those with residual cancer (fold change 30.4, P = 0.017). Patients with NPTX2-low tumors (n = 13) achieved improved response to treatment (P = 0.012 versus NPXT2-high tumors), with 38.5% and 46.1% of patients achieving complete or moderate response, respectively. Of patients with NPTX2-high tumors (n = 27), 11.1% and 18.5% achieved complete or moderate response, respectively. No recurrence or death was recorded in patients with NPTX2-low tumors, reflecting more favorable disease-free survival (P = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Decreased NPTX2 expression in rectal adenocarcinomas is associated with improved response to CRT and improved prognosis. Further studies to validate these results and elucidate the biological role of NPTX2 in rectal cancer are needed.

Predictors of Complete Response and Disease Recurrence Following Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 10-40% of rectal patients have a complete response (CR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT), and these patients have improved survival. Thus, non-operative management ("watch-and-wait" approach) may be an option for select patients. We aimed to identify clinical predictors of CR following CRT.

METHODS

Patients treated with definitive CRT for T3-T4, locally unresectable T1-T2, low-lying T2, and/or node-positive rectal cancer from August 2004 to February 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Most patients were treated with 50.4 Gy radiation and concurrent 5-fluoruracil or capecitabine. Patients were considered to have a CR if surgical pathology revealed ypT0N0M0 (operative management), or if they had no evidence of residual disease on clinical and radiographic assessment (non-operative management). Statistical analysis was carried out to determine predictors of CR and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Complete records were available on 138 patients. The median follow-up was 24.5 months. Thirty-six patients (26.3%) achieved a CR; 30/123 operatively managed patients (24.5%) and 6/15 (40%) non-operatively managed patients. None of the 10 patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma achieved a CR. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≥5 μg/L at diagnosis (OR 0.190, 95% CI 0.037-0.971, p = 0.046), tumor size ≥3 cm (OR 0.123, 95% CI 0.020-0.745, p = 0.023), distance of tumor from the anal verge ≥3 cm (OR 0.091, 95% CI 0.013-0.613, p = 0.014), clinically node-positive disease at diagnosis (OR 0.201, 95% CI 0.045-0.895, p = 0.035), and interval from CRT to surgery ≥8 weeks (OR 5.267, 95% CI 1.068-25.961, p = 0.041) were independent predictors of CR. The CR group had longer 3-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (93.7 vs. 63.7%, p = 0.016) and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) (91.1 vs. 67.8%, p = 0.038). Three-year locoregional control (LRC) (96.6 vs. 81.3%, p = 0.103) and overall survival (97.2 vs. 87.5%, p = 0.125) were higher in the CR group but this did not achieve statistical significance. CR was not an independent predictor of LRC, DMFS, or DFS.

CONCLUSION

CEA at diagnosis, tumor size, tumor distance from the anal verge, node positivity at diagnosis, and interval from CRT to surgery were predictors of CR. These clinical variables may offer insight into patient selection and timing of treatment response evaluation in the watch-and-wait approach.

Watch-and-wait approach versus surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy for patients with rectal cancer (the OnCoRe project): a propensity-score matched cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Induction of a clinical complete response with chemoradiotherapy, followed by observation via a watch-and-wait approach, has emerged as a management option for patients with rectal cancer. We aimed to address the shortage of evidence regarding the safety of the watch-and-wait approach by comparing oncological outcomes between patients managed by watch and wait who achieved a clinical complete response and those who had surgical resection (standard care).

METHODS

Oncological Outcomes after Clinical Complete Response in Patients with Rectal Cancer (OnCoRe) was a propensity-score matched cohort analysis study, that included patients of all ages diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastases who had received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 daily fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy) at a tertiary cancer centre in Manchester, UK, between Jan 14, 2011, and April 15, 2013. Patients who had a clinical complete response were offered management with the watch-and-wait approach, and patients who did not have a complete clinical response were offered surgical resection if eligible. We also included patients with a clinical complete response managed by watch and wait between March 10, 2005, and Jan 21, 2015, across three neighbouring UK regional cancer centres, whose details were obtained through a registry. For comparative analyses, we derived one-to-one paired cohorts of watch and wait versus surgical resection using propensity-score matching (including T stage, age, and performance status). The primary endpoint was non-regrowth disease-free survival from the date that chemoradiotherapy was started, and secondary endpoints were overall survival, and colostomy-free survival. We used a conservative p value of less than 0·01 to indicate statistical significance in the comparative analyses.

FINDINGS

259 patients were included in our Manchester tertiary cancer centre cohort, 228 of whom underwent surgical resection at referring hospitals and 31 of whom had a clinical complete response, managed by watch and wait. A further 98 patients were added to the watch-and-wait group via the registry. Of the 129 patients managed by watch and wait (median follow-up 33 months [IQR 19-43]), 44 (34%) had local regrowths (3-year actuarial rate 38% [95% CI 30-48]); 36 (88%) of 41 patients with non-metastatic local regrowths were salvaged. In the matched analyses (109 patients in each treatment group), no differences in 3-year non-regrowth disease-free survival were noted between watch and wait and surgical resection (88% [95% CI 75-94] with watch and wait vs 78% [63-87] with surgical resection; time-varying p=0·043). Similarly, no difference in 3-year overall survival was noted (96% [88-98] vs 87% [77-93]; time-varying p=0·024). By contrast, patients managed by watch and wait had significantly better 3-year colostomy-free survival than did those who had surgical resection (74% [95% CI 64-82] vs 47% [37-57]; hazard ratio 0·445 [95% CI 0·31-0·63; p<0·0001), with a 26% (95% CI 13-39) absolute difference in patients who avoided permanent colostomy at 3 years between treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

A substantial proportion of patients with rectal cancer managed by watch and wait avoided major surgery and averted permanent colostomy without loss of oncological safety at 3 years. These findings should inform decision making at the outset of chemoradiotherapy.

FUNDING

Bowel Disease Research Foundation.

Predictors of Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Some patients with rectal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) achieve a pathologic complete response (pCR) and may be eligible for less radical surgery or non-operative management. The aim of this study was to identify variables that predict pCR after nCRT for rectal cancer and to examine the impact of pCR on postoperative complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of the NCDB from 2006 to 2011. Patients with rectal cancer who received nCRT followed by radical resection were included in this study. Multivariable analysis of the association between clinicopathologic characteristics and pCR was performed, and propensity-adjusted analysis was used to identify differences in postoperative morbidity between pCR and non-pCR patients.

RESULTS

A total of 23,747 patients were included in the study. Factors associated with pCR included lower tumor grade, lower clinical T and N stage, higher radiation dose, and delaying surgery by more than 6-8 weeks after the end of radiation, while lack of health insurance was linked with a lower likelihood of pCR. Complete response was not associated with an increased risk of major postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Several clinical, pathologic, and treatment variables can help to predict which patients are most likely to have pCR after nCRT for rectal cancer. Awareness of these variables can be valuable in counseling patients regarding prognosis and treatment options.

Watch and wait approach to rectal cancer: A review

In 2014, there were an estimated 136800 new cases of colorectal cancer, making it the most common gastrointestinal malignancy. It is the second leading cause of cancer death in both men and women in the United States and over one-third of newly diagnosed patients have stage III (node-positive) disease. For stage II and III colorectal cancer patients, the mainstay of curative therapy is neoadjuvant therapy, followed by radical surgical resection of the rectum. However, the consequences of a proctectomy, either by low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection, can lead to very extensive comorbidities, such as the need for a permanent colostomy, fecal incontinence, sexual and urinary dysfunction, and even mortality. Recently, trends of complete regression of the rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy have been confirmed by clinical and radiographic evaluation-this is known as complete clinical response (cCR). The “watch and wait” approach was first proposed by Dr. Angelita Habr-Gama in Brazil in 2009. Those patients with cCR are followed with close surveillance physical examinations, endoscopy, and imaging. Here, we review management of rectal cancer, the development of the “watch and wait” approach and its outcomes.

Does Delaying Surgical Resection After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Impact Clinical Outcomes in Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma?: A Single-Institution Experience

OBJECTIVES

Surgical resection for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma commonly occurs 6 to 10 weeks after completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). We sought to determine the optimal timing of surgery related to the pathologic complete response rate and survival endpoints.

METHODS

The study is a retrospective analysis of 92 patients treated with nCRT followed by surgery from 2004 to 2011 at our institution. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the impact of timing of surgery on locoregional control, distant failure (DF), disease-free survival, and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Time-to-surgery was ≤8 weeks (group A) in 72% (median 6.1 wk) and >8 weeks (group B) in 28% (median 8.9 wk) of patients. No significant differences in patient characteristics, locoregional control, or pathologic complete response rates were noted between the groups. Univariate analysis revealed that group B had significantly shorter time to DF (group B, median 33 mo; group A, median not reached, P=0.047) and shorter OS compared with group A (group B, median 52 mo; group A, median not reached, P=0.03). Multivariate analysis revealed that increased time-to-surgery showed a significant increase in DF (HR=2.96, P=0.02) and trends toward worse OS (HR=2.81, P=0.108) and disease-free survival (HR=2.08, P=0.098).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that delaying surgical resection longer than 8 weeks after nCRT was associated with an increased risk of DF. This study, in combination with a recent larger study, questions the recent trend in promoting surgical delay beyond the traditional 6 to 10 weeks. Larger, prospective databases or randomized studies may better clarify surgical timing following nCRT in rectal adenocarcinoma.

New Perspectives on Predictive Biomarkers of Tumor Response and Their Clinical Application in Preoperative Chemoradiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer

Preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and can improve local control and survival outcomes. However, the responses of individual tumors to CRT are not uniform and vary widely, from complete response to disease progression. Patients with resistant tumors can be exposed to irradiation and chemotherapy that are both expensive and at times toxic without benefit. In contrast, about 60% of tumors show tumor regression and T and N down-staging. Furthermore, a pathologic complete response (pCR), which is characterized by sterilization of all tumor cells, leads to an excellent prognosis and is observed in approximately 10-30% of cases. This variety in tumor response has lead to an increased need to develop a model predictive of responses to CRT in order to identify patients who will benefit from this multimodal treatment. Endoscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, serum carcinoembryonic antigen, and molecular biomarkers analyzed using immunohistochemistry and gene expression profiling are the most commonly used predictive models in preoperative CRT. Such modalities guide clinicians in choosing the best possible treatment options and the extent of surgery for each individual patient. However, there are still controversies regarding study outcomes, and a nomogram of combined models of future trends is needed to better predict patient response. The aim of this article was to review currently available tools for predicting tumor response after preoperative CRT in rectal cancer and to explore their applicability in clinical practice for tailored treatment.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and pathological complete response in rectal cancer

The management of rectal cancer has evolved significantly in the last few decades. Significant improvements in local disease control were achieved in the 1990s, with the introduction of total mesorectal excision and neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Level 1 evidence has shown that, with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) the rates of local recurrence can be lower than 6% and, as a result, neoadjuvant CRT currently represents the accepted standard of care. This approach has led to reliable tumor down-staging, with 15-27% patients with a pathological complete response (pCR)-defined as no residual cancer found on histological examination of the specimen. Patients who achieve pCR after CRT have better long-term outcomes, less risk of developing local or distal recurrence and improved survival. For all these reasons, sphincter-preserving procedures or organ-preserving options have been suggested, such as local excision of residual tumor or the omission of surgery altogether. Although local recurrence rate has been stable at 5-6% with this multidisciplinary management method, distal recurrence rates for locally-advanced rectal cancers remain in excess of 25% and represent the main cause of death in these patients. For this reason, more recent trials have been looking at the administration of full-dose systemic chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting (in order to offer early treatment of disseminated micrometastases, thus improving control of systemic disease) and selective use of radiotherapy only in non-responders or for low rectal tumors smaller than 5 cm.

MRI and diffusion-weighted MRI to diagnose a local tumour regrowth during long-term follow-up of rectal cancer patients treated with organ preservation after chemoradiotherapy

Objectives

To assess the value of MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for diagnosing local tumour regrowth during follow-up of organ preservation treatment after chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.

Methods

Seventy-two patients underwent organ preservation treatment (chemoradiotherapy + transanal endoscopic microsurgery or “wait-and-see”) and were followed with MRI including DWI (1.5 T) every 3 -months during the first year and 6 months during following years. Two readers scored each MRI for local regrowth using a confidence level, first on standard MRI, then on standard MRI+DWI. Histology and clinical follow-up were the standard reference. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed and areas under the curve (AUC) and corresponding accuracy figures calculated on a per-scan basis.

Results

Four hundred and forty MRIs were assessed. Twelve patients developed local regrowth. AUC/sensitivity/specificity for standard MRI were 0.95/58 %/98 % (R1) and 0.96/58 % /100 % (R2). For standard MRI+DWI, these numbers were 0.86/75 %/97 % (R1) and 0.98/75 %/100 % (R2). After adding DWI, the number of equivocal scores decreased from 22 to 7 (R1) and from 40 to 20 (R2).

Conclusions

Although there was no overall improvement in diagnostic performance in terms of AUC, adding DWI improved the sensitivity of MRI for diagnosing local tumour regrowth and lowered the rate of equivocal MRIs.

Key Points

• DWI improves sensitivity for detecting local tumour regrowth after organ preservation treatment.

• In particular, DWI can aid in detecting small local recurrence.

• DWI reduces the number of equivocal scores.

Watch and wait policy after preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer; management of residual lesions that appear clinically benign

BACKGROUND

During an ongoing phase II observational study on watch and wait policy in rectal cancer, a substantial number of patients presented residual lesion after radiotherapy with a clinical benign appearance. This article aims to discuss the clinical significance of such findings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Main entry criteria were age ≥70 years and small tumour (≤5 cm and ≤60% of circumferential involvement) located in the low rectum. Patients received chemoradiation (50 Gy, 2 Gy per fraction concomitantly with a 5-Fu bolus and leucovorin) or 5 × 5 Gy if considered unfit for chemotherapy. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) were observed. Those with persistent tumours underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery [TEM] if the baseline tumour was ≤3 cm and cN0 or total mesorectal excision.

RESULTS

The watch and wait procedure was used in 11 out of the total 35 patients (31%) with a cCR; 17 patients (49%) with residual tumours that appeared clinically malignant were referred for TEM or abdominal surgery. In the remaining seven (20%), the residual tumour clinically appeared benign. Of these, there were two invasive cancers, four high-grade dysplasias and one low-grade dysplasia. The five patients with dysplasia, underwent local lesion resection without recurrence within a median of 11 months follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of lesions that appeared clinically benign after radio(chemo)therapy were also benign on pathological examination. Thus, local excision of such lesions should be considered.

Intermediate Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy Combined With Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Outcomes After a Median Follow-Up of 5 Years

BACKGROUND

We previously reported the oncologic results for intermediate neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRT) plus total mesorectal excision (TME) for locally advanced rectal cancer in a retrospective study. The objective of the present study was to further investigate the efficacy and long-term outcomes after this nRT regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2002 to 2011, 382 patients with resectable locally advanced rectal cancer were treated at the Peking University Cancer Hospital with 30 Gy of intermediate nRT in 10 fractions (biologic equivalent dose, 36 Gy) plus TME. Surgery, RT, and pathologic examination were standardized. The primary endpoints were local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median patient age at the initial treatment was 58 years (range, 22-85 years). The median patient follow-up time was 5.5 years. The estimated 5-year LRFS, CSS, and OS were 93.6%, 79.0%, and 73.6%, respectively. Of the 382 patients, 4 (1%), 4 (1%), 4 (1%), and 11 (2.9%) patients died of postoperative complications, secondary malignancies, cardiovascular and/or neurologic events, or other causes, respectively. Seven patients (1.8%) developed late-onset ileus and died after conservative treatment in peripheral hospitals.

CONCLUSION

The 10-fraction intermediate nRT regimen reported in the present study is efficient and safe. The long-term outcome is acceptable. This treatment schedule is useful as an alternative that provides efficiency, patient convenience, and low medical costs.

Nonoperative management of rectal cancer after chemoradiation opposed to resection after complete clinical response. A comparative study

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is the standard treatment of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. Some authors advocate a nonoperative management (NOM) after complete clinical response (cCR) following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). We compare our results with NOM to standard resection in a retrospective analysis.

METHODS

Rectal adenocarcinomas submitted to NOM after CRT between September 2002 and December 2013 were compared to surgical patients that had pathological complete response (pCR) during the same period. Endpoints were Overall Survival (OS), Disease Free Survival (DFS), Local Relapse (LR) and Distant Relapse (DR).

RESULTS

Forty-two NOM patients compared to 69 pCR patients operated after a median interval of 35 weeks after CRT. NOM tumors were distal (83.3% vs 59.4%, p = 0.011), less obstructive (26.2% vs 54.4%, p = 0.005) and had a lower digital rectal score (p = 0.024). Twelve (28.0%) recurrences in NOM group and eight (11.5%) in the surgical group occurred after a follow-up of 47.7 and 46.7 months respectively. Isolated LR occurred in five (11%) NOM patients and one (1.4%) in the surgical group. Four (80%) LR were surgically salvaged in NOM group. No difference in OS was found (71.6% vs 89.9%, p = 0.316) but there was a higher DFS favoring surgical group (60.9% vs 82.8%, p = 0.011). Distal tumors had worse OS compared to proximal tumors in surgical group (5-year OS of 85.5% vs 96.2%, p = 0.038).

CONCLUSION

The NOM achieved OS comparable to surgical treatment and spared patients from surgical morbidity but it resulted in more recurrences. This approach cannot be advocated routinely and controlled trials are warranted.

Surgeon perspectives on the use and effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in the treatment of rectal cancer: a comprehensive review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Despite screening initiatives, rectal cancer remains one of the most prevalent malignancies diagnosed in patients worldwide with a high mortality. The introduction of neoadjuvant therapy has resulted in a paradigm shift in the treatment and outcomes of rectal cancer. Surgeons play an intricate role in the pre-operative, operative, and post-operative management of these patients.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this comprehensive literature review was to summarize the evolution of the use chemotherapy and radiation and the process of differentiation into specific neoadjuvant chemoradiation protocols in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer. This will provide a concise summary for practicing surgeons of the current evidence for neoadjuvant chemoradiation as well as the various implications of therapy on operative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The initial benefit of adjuvant therapy in the treatment of rectal cancer patients became evident with prospective studies demonstrating improvements in various oncologic survival outcomes. Due to the improved compliance and reduced toxicity, as well as the potential for tumor down-staging and sphincter preservation, neoadjuvant approaches became the preferred method of administering chemotherapy and radiation. Furthermore, a subgroup of patients has been shown to present with complete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy. This has resulted in the development of the non-operative "watch and wait" approach, which has initiated discussions on changing the interval from the completion of neoadjuvant therapy to surgical resection. The continued development of the multidisciplinary approach will only further improve our ability to provide patients with the best possible oncologic outcomes.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: current status and future perspectives

With the introduction of population screening initiatives, more patients may be amenable to local, transanal excision (LE) of early-stage rectal cancer. The most important drawback of LE is the risk of understaging node-positive disease. The most powerful predictors of node-positive disease are lymphatic invasion, submucosal invasion depth and width, tumor budding and poor differentiation. Therefore, LE should be reserved for low-risk T1 tumors in those reluctant or unable to undergo major surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by LE for T2 tumors allows adequate local control, and is currently being compared with anterior resection alone in randomized trials. A mere watchful waiting approach has been proposed in clinical complete responders to chemoradiation. However, given the very poor accuracy of current imaging modalities to predict a true pathological complete response, this strategy should not be offered outside of well-controlled trials.

Assessment of Clinical Complete Response After Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer with Digital Rectal Examination, Endoscopy, and MRI: Selection for Organ-Saving Treatment

Background

The response to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer can be assessed by clinical examination, consisting of digital rectal examination (DRE) and endoscopy, and by MRI. A high accuracy is required to select complete response (CR) for organ-preserving treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of clinical examination (endoscopy with or without biopsy and DRE), T2W-MRI, and diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) for the detection of CR after CRT.

Methods

This prospective cohort study in a university hospital recruited 50 patients who underwent clinical assessment (DRE, endoscopy with or without biopsy), T2W-MRI, and DWI at 6–8 weeks after CRT. Confidence levels were used to score the likelihood of CR. The reference standard was histopathology or recurrence-free interval of >12 months in cases of wait-and-see approaches. Diagnostic performance was calculated by area under the receiver operator characteristics curve, with corresponding sensitivities and specificities. Strategies were assessed and compared by use of likelihood ratios.

Results

Seventeen (34 %) of 50 patients had a CR. Areas under the curve were 0.88 (0.78–1.00) for clinical assessment and 0.79 (0.66–0.92) for T2W-MRI and DWI. Combining the modalities led to a posttest probability for predicting a CR of 98 %. Conversely, when all modalities indicated residual tumor, 15 % of patients still experienced CR.

Conclusions

Clinical assessment after CRT is the single most accurate modality for identification of CR after CRT. Addition of MRI with DWI further improves the diagnostic performance, and the combination can be recommended as the optimal strategy for a safe and accurate selection of CR after CRT.

Effect of adding mFOLFOX6 after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve a pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation have an improved prognosis. The need for surgery in these patients has been questioned, but the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response is small. We aimed to assess whether adding cycles of mFOLFOX6 between chemoradiation and surgery increased the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response.

METHODS

We did a phase 2, non-randomised trial consisting of four sequential study groups of patients with stage II-III locally advanced rectal cancer at 17 institutions in the USA and Canada. All patients received chemoradiation (fluorouracil 225 mg/m(2) per day by continuous infusion throughout radiotherapy, and 45·0 Gy in 25 fractions, 5 days per week for 5 weeks, followed by a minimum boost of 5·4 Gy). Patients in group 1 had total mesorectal excision 6-8 weeks after chemoradiation. Patients in groups 2-4 received two, four, or six cycles of mFOLFOX6, respectively, between chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision. Each cycle of mFOLFOX6 consisted of racemic leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) or 400 mg/m(2), according to the discretion of the treating investigator, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) in a 2-h infusion, bolus fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) on day 1, and a 46-h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m(2). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a pathological complete response, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00335816.

FINDINGS

Between March 24, 2004, and Nov 16, 2012, 292 patients were registered, 259 of whom (60 in group 1, 67 in group 2, 67 in group 3, and 65 in group 4) met criteria for analysis. 11 (18%, 95% CI 10-30) of 60 patients in group 1, 17 (25%, 16-37) of 67 in group 2, 20 (30%, 19-42) of 67 in group 3, and 25 (38%, 27-51) of 65 in group 4 achieved a pathological complete response (p=0·0036). Study group was independently associated with pathological complete response (group 4 compared with group 1 odds ratio 3·49, 95% CI 1·39-8·75; p=0·011). In group 2, two (3%) of 67 patients had grade 3 adverse events associated with the neoadjuvant administration of mFOLFOX6 and one (1%) had a grade 4 adverse event; in group 3, 12 (18%) of 67 patients had grade 3 adverse events; in group 4, 18 (28%) of 65 patients had grade 3 adverse events and five (8%) had grade 4 adverse events. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events associated with the neoadjuvant administration of mFOLFOX6 across groups 2-4 were neutropenia (five in group 3 and six in group 4) and lymphopenia (three in group 3 and four in group 4). Across all study groups, 25 grade 3 or worse surgery-related complications occurred (ten in group 1, five in group 2, three in group 3, and seven in group 4); the most common were pelvic abscesses (seven patients) and anastomotic leaks (seven patients).

INTERPRETATION

Delivery of mFOLFOX6 after chemoradiation and before total mesorectal excision has the potential to increase the proportion of patients eligible for less invasive treatment strategies; this strategy is being tested in phase 3 clinical trials.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute.

Predictors of Pathologic Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Treatment for Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) for rectal cancer is associated with better long-term outcomes, and is used as an early indicator of response to novel agents. To assess the rate and predictors of pCR, we performed a retrospective multicenter study involving 5 Canadian cancer centers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cancer registries identified consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma from the Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Cross Cancer Institute, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, and the Dr H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Centre who received fluoropyrimidine-based CRT and had curative intent surgery from 2005 to 2012. Patient, tumor, and therapy characteristics were correlated with response.

RESULTS

Of the 891 patients included, 885 patients had pCR data available. Of the included patients, 161 (18.2%) had a pCR to CRT, and 724 (81.8%) did not. Patients with a pCR had a lower pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, and higher hemoglobin level in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, statin use at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-2.92; P = .04), lower pretreatment CEA level (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .03), and distance closer to anal verge (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15; P = .04) were significant predictors of pCR. The 3-year disease-free survival was 86% in those with a pCR versus 62.5% in those without a pCR (P < .0001) and pCR was associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.17-0.51; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Lower pretreatment CEA level, proximity to anal verge, and statin use are predictors of pCR in our large retrospective cohort. Clinical trials to investigate statins combined with neoadjuvant CRT might be warranted.

Magnetization transfer imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer

Purpose

Single-slice magnetization transfer (MT) imaging has shown promising results for evaluating post-radiation fibrosis. The study aim was to evaluate the value of multislice MT imaging to assess tumour response after chemoradiotherapy by comparing magnetization transfer ratios (MTR) with histopathological tumour regression grade (TRG).

Materials and Methods

Thirty patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (cT3-4 and/or cN2) underwent routine restaging MRI 8 weeks post-chemoradiotherapy, including multislice MT-sequence, covering the entire tumour bed. Two independent readers delineated regions of interest on MTR maps, covering all potential remaining tumour and fibrotic areas. Mean MTR and histogram parameters (minimum, maximum, median, standard deviation, skewness, kurtosis, and 5-30-70-95th percentiles) were calculated. Reference standard was histological TRG1-2 (good response) and TRG3-5 (poor response).

Results

24/30 patients were male; mean age was 67.7 ± 10.8 years. Mean MTR rendered AUCs of 0.65 (reader1) and 0.87 (reader2) to differentiate between TRG1-2 versus TRG3-5. Best results were obtained for 95^th percentile (AUC 0.75- 0.88). Interobserver agreement was moderate (ICC 0.50) for mean MTR and good (ICC 0.80) for 95^th percentile.

Conclusions

MT imaging is a promising tool to assess tumour response post-chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. Particularly, 95^th percentile results in AUCs up to 0.88 to discriminate a good tumour response.

Key Points

• The mean MTR can differentiate between good and poor responders after chemoradiation.

• In addition to measurement of the mean value, histogram analyses can be beneficial.

• The histogram parameter 95^thpercentile can reach AUCs of 0.75–0.88.

Role of Radiotherapy and Newer Techniques in the Treatment of GI Cancers

The role of radiotherapy in multidisciplinary treatment of GI malignancies is well established. Recent advances in imaging as well as radiotherapy planning and delivery techniques have made it possible to target tumors more accurately while sparing normal tissues. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is an advanced method of delivering radiation using cutting-edge technology to manipulate beams of radiation. The role of intensity-modulated radiotherapy is growing for many GI malignancies, such as cancers of the stomach, pancreas, esophagus, liver, and anus. Stereotactic body radiotherapy is an emerging treatment option for some GI tumors such as locally advanced pancreatic cancer and primary or metastatic tumors of the liver. Stereotactic body radiotherapy requires a high degree of confidence in tumor location and subcentimeter accuracy of the delivered dose. New image-guided techniques have been developed to overcome setup uncertainties at the time of treatment, including real-time imaging on the linear accelerator. Modern imaging techniques have also allowed for more accurate pretreatment staging and delineation of the primary tumor and involved sites. In particular, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography scans can be particularly useful in radiotherapy planning and assessing treatment response. Molecular biomarkers are being investigated as predictors of response to radiotherapy with the intent of ultimately moving toward using genomic and proteomic determinants of therapeutic strategies. The role of all of these new approaches in the radiotherapeutic management of GI cancers and the evolving role of radiotherapy in these tumor sites will be highlighted in this review.

Update and current status of diffusion-weighted MRI in anorectal malignancy

SUMMARY 

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is an MRI technique that yields unique information regarding the movement of water molecules at the cellular level. Now widely available and rapid to perform the sequence is increasingly utilized within abdominopelvic oncology, including anorectal cancer imaging. Unfortunately, the diffusion properties of anorectal tumors are complex and not fully understood, with areas of cellular tumor, necrosis and fibrosis co-existing. While DWI shows promise both for staging and in assessing treatment response in anorectal cancer, there remains a lack of consensus regarding its role and integration into standard MRI protocols. This article outlines the basic science behind DWI and reviews the current evidence base for its use in anorectal cancer.

Surveillance after neoadjuvant therapy in advanced rectal cancer with complete clinical response can have comparable outcomes to total mesorectal excision

PURPOSE

While the standard of care for patients with rectal cancer who sustain a complete clinical response (cCR) to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains proctectomy with total mesorectal excision, data suggests that non-operative management may be a safe alternative. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes between patients treated with CRT that attained a cCR and opted for a vigilant surveillance to those of the patients who had a complete pathologic response (cPR) following proctectomy.

METHOD

This is a retrospective review of patients treated for adenocarcinoma of the rectum who achieved either a cCR or a cPR following CRT. Patients with a cCR were enrolled in an active surveillance program which included regularly scheduled exams, proctoscopy, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), endorectal ultrasound, and cross-sectional imaging. Outcomes were compared to those patients who underwent proctectomy with a cPR. Our primary outcome measures were post-treatment complications, recurrence, and survival.

RESULTS

We reviewed 18 patients who opted for surveillance after cCR and 30 patients who underwent proctectomy after a cPR. No non-operative patients had a documented treatment complication, while 17 patients with cPR suffered significant morbidity. There were two recurrences in the active surveillance group, one local and once distant, both treated by salvage resection with no associated mortality at 54 and 62 months. In the cPR group, one patient had a distant recurrence 24 months after surgery which was managed non-operatively. This patient died of unrelated causes 35 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance can be a safe option that avoids the morbidity associated with proctectomy and preserves oncologic outcomes.

Advances and challenges in treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

Dramatic improvements in the outcomes of patients with rectal cancer have occurred over the past 30 years. Advances in surgical pathology, refinements in surgical techniques and instrumentation, new imaging modalities, and the widespread use of neoadjuvant therapy have all contributed to these improvements. Several questions emerge as we learn of the benefits or lack thereof for components of the current multimodality treatment in subgroups of patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). What is the optimal surgical technique for distal rectal cancers? Do all patients need postoperative chemotherapy? Do all patients need radiation? Do all patients need surgery, or is a nonoperative, organ-preserving approach warranted in selected patients? Answering these questions will lead to more precise treatment regimens, based on patient and tumor characteristics, that will improve outcomes while preserving quality of life. However, the idea of shifting the treatment paradigm (chemoradiotherapy, total mesorectal excision, and adjuvant therapy) currently applied to all patients with LARC to a more individually tailored approach is controversial. The paradigm shift toward organ preservation in highly selected patients whose tumors demonstrate clinical complete response to neoadjuvant treatment is also controversial. Herein, we highlight many of the advances and resultant controversies that are likely to dominate the research agenda for LARC in the modern era.

Predicting complete response: is there a role for non-operative management of rectal cancer?

Pre-operative chemoradiotherapy followed by a total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard of care for patients with locally advanced (stage II or III) rectal cancer. Approximately 20% of patients may achieve a pathologic complete response after chemoradiation therapy (CRT), which has been shown to be associated with better oncologic outcomes. Whether surgery can be avoided in this population is an area of active investigation. Recent studies demonstrated feasibility and safety of non-operative management in patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after chemoradiotherapy. In this article, we set out to review the current data on non-operative management and to identify areas requiring further investigation, including improvement in imaging for reassessment after CRT and identifying the optimal time frame for restaging. As the field moves forward with non-operative management in select patients with rectal cancer, there continues to be a need to better understand the prognostic factors and biomarkers that may more accurately characterize patients who are qualified for this "wait-and-see" approach and thereby avoid overtreatment, potentially leading to improvements in long-term quality of life.

Endoscopic evaluation of clinical response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for lower rectal cancer: the significance of endoscopic complete response

PURPOSE

The management of rectal cancer is a significant oncologic challenge because rectal cancer has a poor prognosis among the various types of colorectal cancer. There have been several recent reports on a nonoperative approach for advanced lower rectal cancer, and this may be best for local disease control. However, objective evaluation of tumor response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy has not been standardized. The purpose of this study is to evaluate our method of endoscopic evaluation of complete response.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review. All patients received a long course of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy and 45-50.4 Gy) followed by radical surgical resection from May 2005 to March 2012 in The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research. One hundred fifty-seven patients were reviewed consecutively. Criteria for endoscopic complete response were defined with a focus on the degree of ulcer healing and pit pattern without magnification.

RESULTS

Endoscopic CR (E-CR) evaluation with our definitions reflected histopathologic response evaluation with an accuracy of 91.7 %, sensitivity of 27.8 %, specificity of 100 %, positive predictive value (PPV) of 100 %, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 91.4 % (p < 0.001). Our criteria of E-CR led all cases of y-clinical CR (ycCR) to pathological CR.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic evaluation focused on the degree of ulcer healing, and pit pattern without magnification is useful for judging ycCR.

RandomizEd controlled trial for pre-operAtive dose-escaLation BOOST in locally advanced rectal cancer (RECTAL BOOST study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) consists of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and surgery. Approximately 15% of patients show a pathological complete response (pCR). Increased pCR-rates can be achieved through dose escalation, thereby increasing the number patients eligible for organ-preservation to improve quality of life (QoL). A randomized comparison of 65 versus 50Gy with external-beam radiation alone has not yet been performed. This trial investigates pCR rate, clinical response, toxicity, QoL and (disease-free) survival in LARC patients treated with 65Gy (boost + chemoradiation) compared with 50Gy standard chemoradiation (sCRT).

Methods/design

This study follows the ‘cohort multiple randomized controlled trial’ (cmRCT) design: rectal cancer patients are included in a prospective cohort that registers clinical baseline, follow-up, survival and QoL data. At enrollment, patients are asked consent to offer them experimental interventions in the future. Eligible patients—histologically confirmed LARC (T3NxM0 <1 mm from mesorectal fascia, T4NxM0 or TxN2M0) located ≤10 cm from the anorectal transition who provided consent for experimental intervention offers—form a subcohort (n = 120). From this subcohort, a random sample is offered the boost prior to sCRT (n = 60), which they may accept or refuse. Informed consent is signed only after acceptance of the boost. Non-selected patients in the subcohort (n = 60) undergo sCRT alone and are not notified that they participate in the control arm until the trial is completed.

sCRT consists of 50Gy (25 × 2Gy) with concomitant capecitabine. The boost (without chemotherapy) is given prior to sCRT and consists of 15 Gy (5 × 3Gy) delivered to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The primary endpoint is pCR (TRG 1). Secondary endpoints include acute grade 3–4 toxicity, good pathologic response (TRG 1-2), clinical response, surgical complications, QoL and (disease-free) survival. Data is analyzed by intention to treat.

Discussion

The boost is delivered prior to sCRT so that GTV adjustment for tumor shrinkage during sCRT is not necessary. Small margins also aim to limit irradiation of healthy tissue. The cmRCT design provides opportunity to overcome common shortcomings of classic RCTs, such as slow recruitment, disappointment-bias in control arm patients and poor generalizability.

Trial registration

The Netherlands Trials Register NL46051.041.13. Registered 22 August 2013. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01951521. Registered 18 September 2013.

Assessment of a novel, full-thickness incisional biopsy model to restage rectal tumours after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: results of an ex vivo pilot study

BACKGROUND

There is currently no reliable means to restage rectal cancers after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Recent histological evidence shows that the epicentre for residual cancer cells is focussed directly underneath any residual mucosal abnormality (RMA). This proof-of-concept study aimed to determine the utility of a novel, minimally invasive method of incisional biopsy as a restaging tool. A secondary aim was to compare its performance to clinical response assessment.

METHODS

After surgical resection, 0.5 × 0.5 cm, full-thickness incisional biopsy was performed in 15 rectal cancers. Of these, 13 had RMA and 2 had mucosal cCR but a palpable intramural abnormality. In all patients, a full-thickness incisional biopsy was taken through the centre of these areas. The ypT stage of the incisional biopsy and the final total specimen were compared. Complete mucosal clinical response was deemed to have occurred when either no residual tumour or only a flat mucosal scar remained.

RESULTS

Incisional biopsy correctly identified all patients that had been downstaged to ypT0; however, it also falsely identified 5 of 10 patients (50%) with yp residual disease as ypT0. Overall performance of incisional biopsy to detect residual cancer was 50% sensitivity, 100 % specificity, 100% PPV, and 50% NPV with an accuracy of 66%. A complete mucosal clinical response occurred in only one of five patients downstaged to ypT0 (20% sensitive). It also occurred in one patient, which was ultimately staged as ypT3.

CONCLUSION

This prospective data demonstrates that incisional biopsy is not suitable as a stand-alone method to restage rectal cancer after CRT. Alternate or complementary means of restaging are needed.