1
|
Hazen SMJA, Sluckin TC, Intven MPW, Beets GL, Beets-Tan RGH, Borstlap WAA, Buffart TE, Buijsen J, Burger JWA, van Dieren S, Furnée EJB, Geijsen ED, Hompes R, Horsthuis K, Leijtens JWA, Maas M, Melenhorst J, Nederend J, Peeters KCMJ, Rozema T, Tuynman JB, Verhoef C, de Vries M, van Westreenen HL, de Wilt JH, Zimmerman DDE, Marijnen CAM, Tanis PJ, Kusters M. Abandonment of Routine Radiotherapy for Nonlocally Advanced Rectal Cancer and Oncological Outcomes. JAMA Oncol 2024; 10:202-211. [PMID: 38127337 PMCID: PMC10739079 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.5444] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/30/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
Importance Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy was routinely applied for nonlocally advanced rectal cancer (cT1-3N0-1M0 with >1 mm distance to the mesorectal fascia) in the Netherlands following the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial. This policy has shifted toward selective application after guideline revision in 2014. Objective To determine the association of decreased use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with cancer-related outcomes and overall survival at a national level. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter, population-based, nationwide cross-sectional cohort study analyzed Dutch patients with rectal cancer who were treated in 2011 with a 4-year follow-up. A similar study was performed in 2021, analyzing all patients that were surgically treated in 2016. From these cohorts, all patients with cT1-3N0-1M0 rectal cancer and radiologically unthreatened mesorectal fascia were included in the current study. The data of the 2011 cohort were collected between May and October 2015, and the data of the 2016 cohort were collected between October 2020 and November 2021. The data were analyzed between May and October 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were 4-year local recurrence and overall survival rates. Results Among the 2011 and 2016 cohorts, 1199 (mean [SD] age, 68 [11] years; 430 women [36%]) of 2095 patients (57.2%) and 1576 (mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years; 547 women [35%]) of 3057 patients (51.6%) had cT1-3N0-1M0 rectal cancer and were included, with proportions of neoadjuvant radiotherapy of 87% (2011) and 37% (2016). Four-year local recurrence rates were 5.8% and 5.5%, respectively (P = .99). Compared with the 2011 cohort, 4-year overall survival was significantly higher in the 2016 cohort (79.6% vs 86.4%; P < .001), with lower non-cancer-related mortality (13.8% vs 6.3%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that an absolute 50% reduction in radiotherapy use for nonlocally advanced rectal cancer did not compromise cancer-related outcomes at a national level. Optimizing clinical staging and surgery following the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial has potentially enabled safe deintensification of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanne-Marije J. A. Hazen
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tania C. Sluckin
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn P. W. Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geerard L. Beets
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G. H. Beets-Tan
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wernard A. A. Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tineke E. Buffart
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Buijsen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery and Clinical Epidemiology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Edgar J. B. Furnée
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - E. Debby Geijsen
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC location of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Tom Rozema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Verbeeten Institute, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B. Tuynman
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marianne de Vries
- Department of Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Johannes H.W. de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Corrie A. M. Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J. Tanis
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location of the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Treatment and Quality of Life, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kim JC, Lee JL, Kim CW, Kim JR, Kim J, Park SH. Technical, functional, and oncological validity of robot-assisted total-intersphincteric resection (T-ISR) for lower rectal cancer. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2023; 49:188-195. [PMID: 35864011 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.07.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Revised: 06/14/2022] [Accepted: 07/08/2022] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few studies fairly compared anorectal function and prognostic outcomes between patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) and anorectal-function-saving operations (ASO) under the equivalent conditions. By contrast, surgeons used to be somewhat hesitant to conduct total intersphincteric resection (T-ISR) as maximal ASO, due to its technical complexity and potential anorectal dysfunction. METHODS Propensity-score matched cohorts undergoing robot-assisted R0 surgery [T-ISR vs APR vs partial-subtotal ISR (PS-ISR)/lower anterior resection (LAR)] for rectal cancer (n = 1361) were included. Operative outcomes, recurrence, and disease-free/overall survival (DFS/OS) were analyzed. Anorectal function was evaluated based on fecal incontinence score and high-resolution manometry between the T-ISR and other ASO groups. RESULTS Few differences were detected between the T-ISR and APR groups. More patients undergoing APR had T4 stage disease, while the lowest tumor margin was the same in both groups (mean, 1.5 cm from anal verge). Prognostic outcomes did not differ between the T-ISR and APR groups, including local (5.1% vs 7.7%, p = 1) or systemic (15.4% vs 25.6%, p = 0.401) recurrence, and 5-year DFS (78.7% vs 61.5%, p = 0.1) and OS (89% vs 82.1%, p = 0.434) rates, nor were there differences between the T-ISR and PS-ISR/LAR groups. The PS-ISR group generally showed less anorectal dysfunction than the T-ISR group, but maximal tolerance volume did not differ between these two groups and was within the range for the healthy population. CONCLUSIONS T-ISR can replace most traditional APR, except for advanced T4 disease with aggressive infiltration into the levator-sphincters, and can provide tolerable anorectal dysfunction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jin Cheon Kim
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea.
| | - Jong Lyul Lee
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Chan Wook Kim
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Jung Rang Kim
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Jihun Kim
- Department of Pathology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Seong Ho Park
- Department of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kim JC, Park SH, Kim J, Kim CW, Park IJ, Yoon YS, Lee JL, Kim JH, Hong YS, Kim TW. Involvement of tissue changes induced by neoadjuvant treatment in total mesorectal excision (TME): novel suggestions for determining TME quality. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022; 37:1289-1300. [PMID: 35513539 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-022-04165-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/17/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few studies to date have investigated morphological changes after neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) and their implications in total mesorectal excision (TME). This study was primarily designed to evaluate whether tissue changes associated with NAT affected the quality of TME and additionally to suggest a more objective method evaluating TME quality. METHODS This study enrolled 1322 consecutive patients who underwent curative robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. Patients who did and did not receive NAT were subjected to propensity-score matching, yielding 402 patients in each group. RESULTS NAT independently reduced complete achievement of TME [odds ratio (OR) = 2.056, p = 0.017]. Intraoperative evaluation identified seven tissue changes significantly associated with NAT, including tumor perforation, mucin pool, necrosis, fibrosis, fat degeneration, and rectal or perirectal edema NAT (p < 0.001-0.05). Tumor perforation (OR = 5.299, p = 0.001) and mucin pool (OR = 14.053, p = 0.002) were independently associated with inappropriate (near-complete + incomplete) TME. Complete TME resulted in significantly reduced local recurrence (4.3% vs 15.3%, p = 0.003) and increased 5-year DFS rate (80.6% vs 67.6%, p = 0.047) compared with inappropriate one. By contrast, two tiers of complete and near-complete TMEs vs incomplete TME did not. Notably, among patients with complete TME, those who received NAT had a lower 5-year DFS than those who did not (77.8% vs 83.3%, p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS NAT-associated tissue changes, somewhat interrupting complete TME, may provide unsolved clue to the relative inability of NAT to improve overall survival. The conventional three-tier grading of TME seems to be simplified into two tiers as complete and inappropriate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jin Cheon Kim
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea.
| | - Seong Ho Park
- Department of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Jihun Kim
- Department of Pathology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Chan Wook Kim
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - In Ja Park
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Yong Sik Yoon
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Jong Lyul Lee
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Jong Hoon Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Yong Sang Hong
- Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Tae Won Kim
- Department of Oncology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|