Implications of recent neoadjuvant clinical trials on the future practice of radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

Over the last two decades, the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has been neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus total mesorectal excision followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) and immunotherapy are two major issues in the treatment of LARC. In the two latest phase III randomized controlled trials (RAPIDO and PRODIGE23), the TNT approach achieved higher rates of pathologic complete response and distant metastasis-free survival than conventional chemoradiotherapy. Phase I/II clinical trials have reported promising response rates to neoadjuvant (chemo)-radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy. Accordingly, the treatment paradigm for LARC is shifting toward methods that increase the oncologic outcomes and organ preservation rate. However, despite the progress of these combined modality treatment strategies for LARC, the radiotherapy details in clinical trials have not changed significantly. To guide future radiotherapy for LARC with clinical and radiobiological evidence, this study reviewed recent neoadjuvant clinical trials evaluating TNT and immunotherapy from a radiation oncologist’s perspective.

Patterns of Care for Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy at Predominately Academic Centers between 2016-2020: An NCDB Analysis

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has emerged as the preferred approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), defined as T3/4 or any T with N+ disease. Our objective was to (1) determine the proportion of patients with LARC receiving TNT over time, (2) determine the most common method in which TNT is being delivered, and (3) determine what factors are associated with a greater likelihood of receiving TNT in the United States. Retrospective data was obtained from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between 2016 and 2020. Patients were excluded if they had M1 disease, T1-2 N0 disease, incomplete staging information, nonadenocarcinoma histology, received RT to a nonrectum site, or received a nondefinitive RT dose. Data were analyzed using linear regression, χ² test, and binary logistic regression. Of the 26,375 patients included, most patients were treated at an academic facility (94.6%). Five thousand three (19.0%) patients received TNT, and 21,372 (81.0%) patients did not receive TNT. The proportion of patients receiving TNT increased significantly over time, from 6.1% in 2016 to 34.6% in 2020 (slope = 7.36, 95% CI 4.58-10.15, R² = 0.96, P = .040). The most common TNT regimen was multiagent chemotherapy followed by long-course chemoradiation (73.2% of cases from 2016-2020). There was a significant increase in utilization of short-course RT as part of TNT from 2.8% in 2016 to 13.7% in 2020 (slope = 2.74, 95% CI 0.37-5.11, R² = 0.82, P = .035). Factors associated with a lower likelihood of TNT usage included age >65, female gender, Black race, and T3 N0 disease. TNT use in the United States has increased significantly from 2016-2020, with approximately 34.6% of patients with LARC receiving TNT in 2020. The observed trend appears to be in line with the recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommending TNT as the preferred approach.

Current Practice Patterns in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer at Academic Institutions: A National Survey Among Radiation Oncologists, Medical Oncologists, and Colorectal Surgeons

PURPOSE

To assess the current treatment patterns in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) among radiation oncologists (RO), medical oncologists (MO), and colorectal surgeons (SR) specializing in gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies at academic institutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey consisting of 7 LARC clinical vignettes was distributed to GI specialists practicing at ACGME accredited academic institutions. Treatment paradigms consisted of long-course chemoradiation (LC-CRT) and short-course (SCRT) radiotherapy, chemotherapy (CHT), and surgery. The survey was open from January to April 2021.

RESULTS

Thirty-six RO, 14 MO and 21 SR (71/508 physicians) replied resulting in a response rate of 14.0%. For low rectal node positive tumors, 88.7% of primary recommendations incorporated TNT (73.1% LC-CRT, 26.9% SCRT). NOM was preferred by 41.3% if a clinical complete response (cCR) was achieved. The presence of high-risk features led 95.8% of physicians to employ TNT (79.4% LC-CRT, 20.6% SCRT). For a cT3N1-2 mid-rectal tumor without high-risk features, 85.9% would primarily recommend TNT (56.6% LC-CRT, 43.4% SCRT). For a cT4bN2a mid-rectal tumor without high-risk features, 97.2% of primary recommendations included TNT (76.9% LC-CRT, 23.1% SCRT).

CONCLUSION

Among academic RO, MO, and SR, the traditional regimen of LC-CRT, surgery, and adjuvant CHT is now infrequently recommended for LARC. TNT has been widely adopted for locally advanced node positive rectal tumors with variable patterns of care with respect to sequencing of CHT and RT. Fractionation with LC-CRT remained the majority. Non-operative management after a cCR in low rectal tumors has gained traction transforming LARC from a once classically perceived surgical disease.

Three perspectives: the approach to neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer according to medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and surgeons

Background: Two treatment options considered for radiotherapy are short-course radiotherapy and immediate surgery, or chemoradiation with 5-Fluorouracil based chemotherapy and delayed surgery. Aim of the study: Evaluate the real-life treatment approaches of medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists, to neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancers. Material and methods: An online survey was established via Google Forms. The survey was taken voluntarily by medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, and general surgeons. Results: Of those who participated, 183 were medical oncologists, 36 were radiotherapists, and 36 were surgeons. Most of the study population preferred long-course radiation therapy and chemotherapy (85%). Meanwhile, two-thirds of the participants preferred chemotherapy prior to operating. The most frequent chemotherapy cycles for the pre-operative setting were ‘three’ and ‘four-or-more’ (27.8% and 25.1%, respectively). Medical oncologists had a significantly higher tendency to offer chemotherapy between radiation therapy and surgery compared to the other groups. Optimal time of surgery was different between groups, but there was no difference among groups between surgery and the ‘watch & wait’ strategy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens were significantly different between groups. Conclusions: We found that the new pre-operative chemotherapy regimen with short-course radiotherapy was slowly adopted into current practice. Also, medical oncologists tended to prefer pre-operative chemotherapy in comparison to the other groups.

The in-silico feasibility of dose escalated, hypofractionated radiotherapy for rectal cancer

Background and purpose

Short course radiotherapy (SCRT) has a low biological prescription dose. Rectal cancer has a dose response relationship and moderate α/β ratio (∼5). We hypothesise hypofractionated dose escalation has radiobiological advantages. We assessed in-silico dose escalation to the primary tumour using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique.

Materials and methods

Patients who had received 25 Gy/5# were enrolled. GTV was macroscopic tumour including lumen. CTVA was GTV + 10 mm. CTVB included elective nodes. PTV_Low was created from CTVF (CTVA + CTVB) + 7 mm. PTV_High (SIB) was GTV + 5 mm margin. OAR were as per RTOG guidelines. Each patient had 4 plans created at increasing dose levels (27.5 Gy, 30 Gy, 32.5 Gy and 35 Gy) to PTV_High. PTV_Low was 25 Gy/5#.5 test plans were created for each patient in Eclipse™ v15.5 and consisted of 2 VMAT full arcs (6 MV), Varian Truebeam (2.7). Planning objectives were set in the Photon optimiser (PO) and recalculated using Acuros v15.5. A priori feasibility was defined as 90% of plans achieving the planning objectives at 32.5 Gy dose level (EqD2 53.4 Gy).

Results

20 SCRT patients median age 70, F (n = 5), M (n = 15). Rectum level; low (n = 12), mid (n = 3) and upper (n = 5). 100 plans were analysed. Mean volume of PTV_High was 130 cm³ (SD 81.5) and PTV_Low 769.6 cm³ (SD 241.1). 100% plans complied with mandatory planning dose metrics for each structure at the 25 Gy/5# plan and each dose level.

Conclusion

Hypofractionated dose escalation to the primary tumour up to 35 Gy/5# is technically feasible in rectal cancer radiotherapy.

Association of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, radiotherapy fractionation/technique, and risk of development of distant metastasis among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We investigated the prognostic impact of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and whether modifiable factors in radiotherapy (RT) influenced the NLR.

METHODS

Data of 1386 patients who were treated with neoadjuvant RT and concurrent or sequential chemotherapy for LARC between 2006 and 2019 were evaluated. Most patients (97.8%) were treated with long-course RT (LCRT; 50-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions) using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) (n = 851) or helical tomotherapy (n = 504), and 30 patients underwent short-course RT (SCRT; 25 Gy in 5 fractions, followed by XELOX administration for 6 weeks). Absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte counts were obtained at initial diagnosis, before and during the preoperative RT course, and after preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy. The primary endpoint was distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 61.3 (4.1-173.7) months; the 5-year DMFS was 80.1% and was significantly associated with the NLR after RT but not before. A post-RT NLR ≥ 4 independently correlated with worse DMFS (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.80), along with higher ypT and ypN stages. Post-RT NLR (≥ 4) more frequently increased following LCRT (vs. SCRT, odds ratio [OR] 2.77, p = 0.012) or helical tomotherapy (vs. 3D-CRT, OR 1.29, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased NLR after neoadjuvant RT is associated with increased distant metastasis risk and poor survival outcome in patients with LARC. Moreover, high NLR following RT is directly related to RT fractionation, delivery modality, and tumor characteristics. These results are hypothesis-generating only, and confirmatory studies are required.

Total Neoadjuvant Therapy With Short-Course Radiation: US Experience of a Neoadjuvant Rectal Cancer Therapy

BACKGROUND

Short-course radiation followed by chemotherapy as total neoadjuvant therapy has been investigated primarily in Europe and Australia with increasing global acceptance. There are limited data on this regimen's use in the United States, however, potentially delaying implementation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare clinical performance and oncologic outcomes of 2 rectal cancer neoadjuvant treatment modalities: short-course total neoadjuvant therapy versus standard chemoradiation.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was performed at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center.

PATIENTS

A total of 413 patients had locally advanced rectal cancers diagnosed from June 2009 to May 2018 and received either short-course total neoadjuvant therapy or standard chemoradiation.

INTERVENTIONS

There were 187 patients treated with short-course total neoadjuvant therapy (5 × 5 Gy radiation followed by consolidation oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy) compared with 226 chemoradiation recipients (approximately 50.4 Gy radiation in 28 fractions with concurrent fluorouracil equivalent).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary end points were tumor downstaging, measured by complete response and "low" neoadjuvant rectal score rates, and progression-free survival. Secondary analyses included treatment characteristics and completion, sphincter preservation, and recurrence rates.

RESULTS

Short-course total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with higher rates of complete response (26.2% vs 17.3%; p = 0.03) and "low" neoadjuvant rectal scores (40.1% vs 25.7%; p < 0.01) despite a higher burden of node-positive disease (78.6% vs 68.9%; p = 0.03). Short-course recipients also completed trimodal treatment more frequently (88.4% vs 50.4%; p < 0.01) and had fewer months with temporary stomas (4.8 vs 7.0; p < 0.01). Both regimens achieved comparable local control (local recurrence: 2.7% short-course total neoadjuvant therapy vs 2.2% chemoradiation, p = 0.76) and 2-year progression-free survival (88.2% short-course total neoadjuvant therapy (95% CI, 82.9-93.5) vs 85.6% chemoradiation (95% CI, 80.5-90.7)).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, unbalanced disease severity, and variable dosing of neoadjuvant consolidation chemotherapy were limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-course total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with improved downstaging and similar progression-free survival compared with chemoradiation. These results were achieved with shortened radiation courses, improved treatment completion, and less time with diverting ostomies. Short-course total neoadjuvant therapy is an optimal regimen for locally advanced rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B724.TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL CON RADIACIÓN DE CORTA DURACIÓN: EXPERIENCIA ESTADOUNIDENSE DE UNA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE CONTRA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO.

ANTECEDENTES

La radiación de corta duración seguida de quimioterapia como terapia neoadyuvante total se ha investigado principalmente en Europa y Australia con una aceptación mundial cada vez mayor. Sin embargo, datos limitados sobre el uso de este régimen en los Estados Unidos, han potencialmente retrasando su implementación.

OBJETIVO

Comparar el desempeño clínico y los resultados oncológicos de dos modalidades de tratamiento neoadyuvante del cáncer de recto: terapia neoadyuvante total de corta duración versus quimioradiación. estándar.

DISEO

Cohorte retrospectivo.

AJUSTE

Centro oncológico designado por el NCI.

PACIENTES

Un total de 413 cánceres rectales localmente avanzados diagnosticados entre junio de 2009 y mayo de 2018 que recibieron cualquiera de los regímenes neoadyuvantes.

INTERVENCIONES

Hubo 187 pacientes tratados con terapia neoadyuvante total de ciclo corto (radiación 5 × 5 Gy seguida de quimioterapia de consolidación basada en oxaliplatino) en comparación con 226 pacientes de quimiorradiación (aproximadamente 50,4 Gy de radiación en 28 fracciones con equivalente de fluorouracilo concurrente).

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Los criterios primarios de valoración fueron la disminución del estadio del tumor, medido por la respuesta completa y las tasas de puntuación rectal neoadyuvante "baja", y la supervivencia libre de progresión. Los análisis secundarios incluyeron las características del tratamiento y las tasas de finalización, conservación del esfínter y recurrencia.

RESULTADOS

La terapia neoadyuvante total de corta duración, se asoció con tasas más altas de respuesta completa (26,2% versus 17,3%, p = 0,03) y puntuaciones rectales neoadyuvantes "bajas" (40,1% versus 25,7%, p < 0,01) a pesar de una mayor carga de enfermedad con ganglios positivos (78,6% versus 68,9%, p = 0,03). Los pacientes de ciclo corto también completaron el tratamiento trimodal con mayor frecuencia (88,4% versus 50,4%, p < 0,01) y tuvieron menos meses con estomas temporales (4,8 versus 7,0, p < 0,01). Ambos regímenes lograron un control local comparable (recidiva local: 2,7% de SC-TNT versus 2,2% de TRC, p = 0,76) y supervivencia libre de progresión a 2 años (88,2% de SC-TNT [IC: 82,9 - 93,5] versus 85,6% CRT [CI: 80,5 - 90,7]).

LIMITACIONES

Diseño retrospectivo, gravedad de la enfermedad desequilibrada y dosificación variable de quimioterapia neoadyuvante de consolidación.

CONCLUSIONES

La terapia neoadyuvante total de ciclo corto se asoció con una mejora en la reducción del estadio y una supervivencia libre de progresión similar en comparación con la quimioradiación. Estos resultados se lograron con ciclos de radiación más cortos, tratamientos mejor finalizados y menos tiempo en ostomías de derivación. La terapia neoadyuvante total de corta duración es un régimen óptimo para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B724. (Traducción- Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Lessons Learned in Managing Patients with Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OPINION STATEMENT

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to rapidly and dramatically shift our medical priorities and decision making. With little literature or experience to rely on, the initial priority was to minimize patient exposure to the hospital and to others. It remains unclear whether cancer patients are at higher risk of infection or serious complications, or if it is our traditional therapies that place them to be at higher risk. By far, the greatest negative impact was on screening. Routine colonoscopies were considered elective, and as a result, delays in diagnosis will be felt for years to come. The most positive changes were the incorporation of tele-visits, increased use of oral therapies, alterations in treatment schedules of both chemotherapy and radiation, and an increased emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy. These too will be felt for years to come. The colorectal cancer medical community has responded collaboratively and effectively to maintain treatment and to optimize outcomes for our patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Comparing neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy with short-course radiotherapy in rectal cancer

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare short-course radiotherapy (SC) or neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LC) treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who had undergone neoadjuvant radiotherapy before surgery between 2013 and 2018 at the medical center in China were included in this study. All patients’ MRI confirmed T2N+M0 or T3-4N0-3M0 clinical stages. Patients in the SC group received pelvic radiotherapy with a dose of 5 × 5 Gy (with or without chemotherapy at any time), followed by immediate or delayed surgery. Patients in the LC group received a dose of 50–50.4 Gy in 25–28 fractions, concomitantly with FOLFOX or capecitabine-based chemotherapy, followed by surgery 4–6 weeks later. All clinical data were retrospectively collected, and long-term follow-up was completed and recorded at the same time.

Results

A total of 170 were eligible to participate in this study, 32 patients in the SC group, and 138 in the LC group. The median follow-up time of living patients was 39 months. The disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates in the SC group and LC group at 3 years, were, 84.9% versus 72.4% (P = 0.273) and 96.2% versus 87.2% (P = 0.510), respectively. The complete pathological response (pCR) rates in the SC group and LC group were, 25% versus 18.1% (the difference was not statistically significant, P = 0.375), respectively. However, the SC group had better node(N) downstaging compared to the LC group (P = 0.011).

Conclusions

There were no differences observed in DFS and OS between short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiation, and both can be used as treatment options for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Management of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer During The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Necessary Paradigm Change at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

The COVID-19 pandemic will consume significant health care resources. Given the concerns for rapidly increasing infection rates in the United States, impending staffing shortages, and the potential for resource reallocation, we rapidly reevaluated our rectal cancer practice policies during this public health emergency. Before the pandemic, we commonly used total neoadjuvant therapy with a strong preference for long-course chemoradiation. In the setting of the ongoing pandemic, we now mandate short-course radiation therapy (SCRT). Despite multiple randomized trials demonstrating no difference in locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence, or overall survival between SCRT and long-course chemoradiation, the adaptation of SCRT in the United States has been low given concerns for less tumor downstaging and increased toxicity. In the setting of the ongoing and likely prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, we feel that these concerns must be reevaluated, because SCRT presents a well-validated alternative that will allow us to meet the needs of a greater number of potentially curable patients at a time when resources are severely and acutely constrained.

Pathologic Response and Postoperative Complications After Short-course Radiation Therapy and Chemotherapy for Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The role of neoadjuvant short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) in treating rectal adenocarcinoma is a topic of ongoing debate. Growing interest in total neoadjuvant therapy has spurred discussion on the optimal sequence of preoperative SCRT and chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients receiving SCRT (5 Gy × 5 fractions) were identified. Details about preoperative treatments, radiation toxicities, and postoperative complications were collected. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent surgery within 14 days of completing SCRT and those with a longer delay. Outcomes compared included extent of pathologic response, margin-negative resection rate, acute radiation toxicities, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients with locally advanced or metastatic rectal cancer received SCRT between 2008 and 2018. Thirty-nine of 57 patients underwent definitive pelvic surgery with total mesorectal excision. There were no significant differences in tumor downstaging, radial margin status, or percent tumor viability between patients with immediate surgery versus delayed surgery. The delay group had higher rates of nodal downstaging (64.7% vs. 18.2%; P = .003). There were no differences in total or grade 3+ gastrointestinal radiation toxicity, postoperative complications, reoperation, readmission, and mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Though not yet common in the United States, SCRT has compared favorably with long course chemoradiation in multiple trials. Moreover, it is associated with greater efficiency and less disruption to chemotherapy. Our data show similar response and toxicity outcomes between the immediate and delay groups, suggesting SCRT is well-tolerated regardless of treatment sequence. Recently completed prospective trials may reveal the optimal preoperative treatment sequence.

Phase 1 Study of Neoadjuvant Short-Course Radiation Therapy Concurrent With Infusional 5-Fluorouracil for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Purpose

To assess the safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant short-course radiation therapy (RT) concurrent with continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Methods and Materials

Patients with cT3-4 or N + rectal adenocarcinoma based on ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging were prospectively enrolled in this study. Study treatment consisted of continuous infusion 5-FU combined with short-course RT (5 Gy x 5 fractions) followed by 4 cycles of mFOLFOX, total mesorectal excision (TME), and 6 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFOX. To mitigate the potential added toxicity from concurrent 5-FU, intensity modulated RT was used. Using the continual reassessment method, the dose of 5-FU was escalated from 100 to a maximum-tolerated dose of 200 mg/m²/d.

Results

Fourteen patients were accrued. All patients completed continuous infusion 5-FU and short-course RT and the 5-FU dose was safely escalated to 200 mg/m²/d with no dose-limiting toxicity. Thirteen patients received the neoadjuvant mFOLFOX, and only 1 patient went straight to surgery after chemoradiation. Clinical response was 21% complete, 63% partial, 14% stable disease, and no patients had progression. Three patients with cCR had negative biopsies and did not have TME. Pathologic response was 64% partial response and 14% stable disease. No patients had pathologic progression. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities were cytopenias. The most common grade 1 and 2 toxicities were cytopenia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that concurrent chemotherapy with neoadjuvant short-course RT is feasible and can be safely given with concurrent continuous infusion 5-FU. This works adds to the growing evidence that short-course RT is not only equivalent to long-course RT, but also may provide additional benefits, such as allowing for a transition to full dose systemic therapy in the neoadjuvant setting, selective organ preservation in complete responders, and providing a more convenient and cost-effective way of delivering pelvic RT.

Cost-effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Therapy vs Long-Course Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Although both short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have been practiced in parallel for more than 15 years, no cost-effectiveness analysis comparing these 2 approaches in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has been published.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic evaluation used a cost-effectiveness model simulating 10-year outcomes for 1 million hypothetical patients aged 65 years with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with either short-course radiotherapy or long-course chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgery and chemotherapy. Utilities and probabilities from the literature and costs from the Healthcare Bluebook and Medicare fee schedules were used to determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. It was assumed that long-course chemoradiotherapy would result in higher rates of low anterior resection (LAR). To model preference-sensitive care, a 2-way sensitivity analysis was conducted in which the utilities of the no-evidence-of-disease (NED) states with LAR and abdominoperineal resection (APR) were simultaneously varied. The analysis was repeated for patients with distal rectal tumors. Analysis was conducted from January to October 2018.

EXPOSURES

Short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

Short-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $133 495 per quality-adjusted life-year). Two-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost-effective approach for a given patient depended on the utilities for the NED-LAR and NED-APR states. Assuming that a greater proportion of patients with locally advanced distal tumors undergoing long-course chemoradiotherapy (39%) would proceed to LAR compared with those treated with short-course radiotherapy (19%), long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $61 123 per quality-adjusted life-year).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Short-course radiotherapy was the cost-effective strategy compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The cost-effectiveness of short-course radiotherapy vs long-course chemoradiotherapy was sensitive to the utilities of the NED-LAR and NED-APR health states, highlighting the importance of care that is sensitive to patient preference. Long-course chemoradiotherapy was the cost-effective approach for patients with distal tumors.

Novelties in treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

Treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is evolving through surgical innovation and paradigm shifts in neoadjuvant treatment. Whereas local recurrence was a significant concern before the systematic implementation of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and surgery according to total mesorectal excision principles, distant relapse remains a major drawback. Hence, efforts in recent years have focused on delivering preoperative chemotherapy regimens to overcome compliance issues with adjuvant administration. In parallel, new surgical techniques, including transanal video-assisted total mesorectal excision and robot-assisted surgery, emerged to face the challenge to navigate in the deep and narrow spaces of the pelvis. Furthermore, patients experiencing a complete response after neoadjuvant treatment might even escape surgery within a close surveillance strategy. This novel "watch and wait" concept has gained interest to improve quality of life in highly selected patients. This review summarizes recent evidence and controversies and provides an overview on timely and innovative aspects in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Utilization of short-course radiation therapy for patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma in the United States

Purpose

Preoperative short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) for patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma has been studied in European trials, but is not often used in the United States. We aim to describe the utilization of preoperative SCRT among patients with nonmetastatic rectal cancer in the National Cancer Database and describe factors associated with its use.

Methods and materials

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients treated with preoperative radiation therapy followed by surgery for nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma between 2004 and 2014. Patient, tumor, and treatment-related characteristics were compared between patients treated with SCRT (20-25 Gy in <7 fractions) and patients treated with long-course radiation therapy (45-70 Gy in ≥ 25 fractions). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate factors associated with overall survival. Survival rates were compared using an inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment method.

Results

A total of 42,336 patients were included for analysis of which 41,867 patients (98.9%) were treated with long-course radiation therapy and 469 patients (1.1%) with SCRT. Patients treated with SCRT were older, had more comorbidities, had earlier T-stage, and were more likely to be clinically node-negative. Patients treated with SCRT were more likely to be treated at an academic center, have Medicare insurance, and be treated without chemotherapy. Patients treated with SCRT had lower pathological complete response rates (4.3% vs 6.9%; P < .001) and higher rates of positive circumferential resection margins (8.3% vs 5.2%; P = .001). On multivariate analysis, radiation fractionation was not significantly associated with overall survival.

Conclusions

SCRT is used for only approximately 1% of patients treated preoperatively for nonmetastatic rectal cancer in the United States. The results of recently completed randomized trials may further inform patterns of practice in the United States and abroad.

Trends and disparities in the utilization of hypofractionated neoadjuvant radiation therapy for rectal cancer in the United States

Background

Neoadjuvant conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) versus hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) for rectal cancer (RC) is among the most controversial and debatable areas of radiotherapeutic management. This is the only known study evaluating the utilization of neoadjuvant HFRT for RC in the United States, and focuses on trends and health disparities.

Methods

The National Cancer Data Base was queried [2004-2015] for newly-diagnosed cT3-T4 N_any or cT_any N1-2 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing neoadjuvant RT, with or without chemotherapy, followed by resection. Following analysis based on temporal trends, multivariate logistic regression determined factors associated with receipt of HFRT.

Results

Altogether, 29,994 patients met study criteria: 29,724 (99%) were treated with CFRT, and 270 (1%) with HFRT. Temporally, utilization of HFRT rose significantly, from 0.2% in 2004 to 2.0% in 2015, with the steepest slope at most recent time periods. HFRT was more likely administered to older patients, those with more comorbidities, and node-positive disease (P<0.05 for all). There were racial differences, as African-Americans were independently less likely to receive HFRT (P=0.043). The two strongest predictors of HFRT administration (by odds ratio) were time period and therapy at academic centers (P<0.05 for all).

Conclusions

Although HFRT is underutilized in the US, its use is rising and has increased nearly tenfold over the last decade. Disparities in HFRT delivery are emphasized, especially concerning disease-/patient-specific factors, socioeconomic status, and race. These data may serve as a benchmark for future investigation as well as for health disparities in the radiotherapeutic treatment of RC.

Short-course Versus Long-course Neoadjuvant Therapy for Non-metastatic Rectal Cancer: Patterns of Care and Outcomes From the National Cancer Database

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to compare the utilization, pathologic response, and overall survival (OS) between long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation (LC-CRT) and short-course neoadjuvant radiation (SC-RT) in the treatment of non-metastatic rectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Retrospective data was obtained from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients diagnosed with clinical stage II or III (limited to T3, any N or T1-2, N1-2) rectal cancer between 2004 and 2014 (28,193 patients). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate factors associated with receipt of SC-RT, pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, and OS. Patients were compared based on the neoadjuvant therapy they received prior to tumor resection. SC-RT was defined as 25 Gy given over 1 week prior to surgery (with or without chemotherapy as part of their treatment course). LC-CRT was defined as 45 to 60 Gy given over 5 to 6 weeks (with chemotherapy) prior to surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 27,988 (99%) of patients received LC-CRT, and 205 (1%) patients received SC-RT. Receipt of SC-RT was associated with older age, more comorbidities, and treatment at an academic facility (P < .001 for each). Additional days from radiation completion to surgery was associated with a higher pCR rate (P < .001 for both). LC-CRT did not lead to increased OS compared with SC-RT (P = .517).

CONCLUSIONS

In this United States database study, there was no improvement in OS for patients receiving LC-CRT compared with SC-RT; however, a longer interval between radiation therapy and surgery led to a higher pCR rate. Academic facilities were more likely to utilize SC-RT compared with other facilities.

Short-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery are beneficial in Chinese patients: A retrospective study

Preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACR) is used to reduce tumor size for easier resection or improved resectability rates. Considering the difficulties regarding health insurance and health resources in China, an evidence-based short-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with surgery to cure patients was performed. This study compared the postoperative effects between short-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery and surgery without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.The current retrospective study was based on a rectal cancer database, including 274 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between January 2014 and October 2016. Data were analyzed with respect to curative rate, postoperative recovery indicators (times to nasogastric tube, urinary catheter, and drainage tube removal and times to first oral feeding and passing of flatus postsurgery), chemoradiotherapy-related indicators [white blood cell count (WBC) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels], and adverse effects indicators, evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0.There was no significant difference between the combined therapy and surgery groups (P > .05) in terms of radical resection rates and the times to urinary catheter removal and passing flatus (P > .05). Statistically significant differences (P < .05) in terms of earlier time for removal of the nasogastric and drainage tubes and time to first oral feeding were observed in the combined therapy group. The decreases in WBC and CEA levels in the combined therapy group were significantly greater than those in the surgery group 1 week after surgery (P < .05); after 1 month, the CEA decrease in the combined therapy group was significantly greater than that in the surgery group (P < .05). More patients in the combined therapy group experienced vomiting, indigestion, dehydration, oral mucositis, sensory neuritis, and alopecia compared with those in the surgery group 1 week after surgery (P < .05); after 1 month, only the incidence of alopecia was higher in the combined therapy group (P < .05).The combined therapy group demonstrated earlier postoperative recovery compared with the surgery group. Short-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with surgery may lead to postoperative treatment-related adverse effects of varying degrees; however, these adverse effects eventually improve with time.