Risk of recurrence after local resection of T1 rectal cancer: a meta-analysis with meta-regression

Salvageable locoregional recurrence and stoma rate after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer - A nationwide cross-sectional cohort study

BACKGROUND

Screening has increased the incidence of early-stage rectal cancer and interest in rectal-preserving treatment strategies. Although guidelines recommend completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) in the presence of histological risk factor(s) after local excision, surgery-related morbidity often deters patients from cTME. Additionally, locoregional recurrences (LR) identified during surveillance may still be salvageable. This study evaluates oncological and surgical outcomes in pT1-2 rectal cancer patients who received local excision with or without additional therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional national cohort study was conducted in 67 Dutch hospitals, including all patients who underwent curative surgical resection for rectal cancer in 2016. Patients with pT1-2 tumours who received surveillance, cTME or adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after local excision were selected. The primary outcome was LR. Secondary endpoints included ostomy rate, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of 3057 patients, 219 underwent local excision, followed by surveillance in 74 % (n = 162), cTME in 23 % (n = 51), and adjuvant (chemo)radiation in 3 % (n = 6). Median follow-up was 46 months (IQR 29-54). Four-year LR rates were 14 % and 4 % after surveillance and cTME, respectively (p = 0.033). In the surveillance group, 16 of 20 patients (80 %) who developed LR were treated with curative intent. cTME resulted in a substantially higher ostomy rate (43 % vs 4 %, p = 0.001). No significant differences were found in 4-year DFS and OS.

CONCLUSION

Despite a LR rate of 14 % after local excision alone, the majority of these recurrences could be treated with curative intent. Additionally, the risk of stoma was 10-fold lower after surveillance compared to cTME.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT05539417, https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT05539417.

Endoscopic surveillance for colorectal cancer and its precursor lesions in Lynch syndrome; time for some policy shifts?

BACKGROUND

While numerous studies have demonstrated variations in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence among Lynch Syndrome (LS)-associated germline pathogenic variant (gPV) carriers, limited data are available regarding tailoring surveillance and treatment strategies. The main goal of this study was to estimate whether personalised care could be offered based on the different gPVs (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2). Additionally, the outcome from patient-shared care for early (T1) CRC was investigated.

METHODS

The study is performed as a single centre retrospective analysis of our cohort of patients with a LS-associated gPV in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 or PMS2. Colon surveillance data from between January 1978 to February 2024 were collected. Analyses were performed to identify differences in incidence of precursor lesions and CRC between the different variants and treatment variation for CRC in LS.

RESULTS

From a cohort of 621 LS individuals 496 (133 MLH1, 107 MSH2, 180 MSH6 and 76 PMS2) could be included in this study. Analyses revealed that, despite adequate surveillance intervals and lower adenoma incidence, individuals with a gPV in MLH1 or MSH2 have higher CRC incidences compared to MSH6 or PMS2. Most detected CRC lesions were early stage (T1) CRCs. Treatment for T1 CRC varied considerably; in 68% of the cases deviating from a subtotal colectomy, with nearly equivalent recurrence rates.

DISCUSSION

Based on higher precursor lesion detection and lower CRC incidences in LS individuals with a gPV in MSH6 or PMS2 under biannual endoscopic surveillance, this study supports the potential for extended surveillance intervals in the latter group. As treatment for the detected T1 CRCs varied considerably with nearly equivalent recurrence rates, in selected cases less invasive interventions for LS individuals could be considered.

Is tumour location a dominant risk factor of recurrence in early rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

Impact of rectal tumour location on risk of lymph node metastases (LNM) and recurrence in early RC is poorly studied and elusive. Tumour location as a prognostic factor may contribute to optimise management of early RC in the future. The aim of this study was to investigate rectal tumour location as an independent predictor of oncologic outcome in early rectal cancer (RC).

METHODS

Retrospective multicentre national cohort study on prospectively collected data on all patients with T1-T2 RC, undergoing surgical resection between 2009 and 2021. Tumour location was categorised as distal (0-5 cm), mid (5-10 cm), and proximal (10-16 cm), measured from the anal verge.

RESULTS

Incidence of LNM in the 2424 included T1-T2 RC patients was 18.2%, 17.3% and 21.6% for distal, mid and proximal tumours, respectively. Recurrence was detected in 130 (7.6%) out of 1705 patients available for recurrence analyses (60-month median follow-up). Incidence of recurrence was twice as high in distal (11.4%) compared to proximal (5.6%) tumours and was 8.3% in mid located tumours. Distal (HR 2.051, CI 1.248-3.371, P < 0.05) and mid (HR 1.592, CI 1.061-2.388, P < 0.05) tumour location were significant risk factors of recurrence in uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that tumour location significantly affects incidence of recurrence in early RC, with an increasing risk for mid and especially distal location, found to be a predominant risk factor of recurrence. Our findings stress the need for an increased awareness on differences in oncologic outcome related to tumour location in early RC.

Complete resection of recurrent anal canal cancer using endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal resection: A case report

BACKGROUND

Early anal canal cancer is frequently treated with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to preserve anal function. However, if the lesion is in the anal canal, then significant difficulties such as bleeding and challenges associated with scope manipulation can arise.

CASE SUMMARY

A 70-year-old woman undergoing follow-up after transverse colon cancer surgery was diagnosed with anal canal cancer extending to the dentate line. The patient underwent a combination of ESD and transanal resection (TAR). The specimen was excised in pieces, which resulted in difficulty performing the pathological evaluation of the margins, especially on the anal side where TAR was performed and severe crushing was observed. Careful follow-up was performed, and local recurrence was observed 3 years postoperatively. Because the patient had superficial cancer without lymph node metastasis, local resection was performed again. The second treatment attempt was improved as follows: (1) TAR and ESD were performed appropriately based on the situation by the same physician; (2) A needle scalpel was used during TAR to prevent tissue crushing; and (3) The lesion borders were marked using ESD techniques before treatment. Complete resection was performed without complications.

CONCLUSION

Anal canal lesions can be safely and reliably removed when ESD and TAR are used appropriately.

Local Recurrence of Premalignant and Early Malignant Rectal Polyps Treated by TEM-A Single-Center Experience

Background: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a minimally invasive approach for excising rectal polyps, particularly those with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or early-stage rectal cancer (T1). This study aimed to evaluate the recurrence risk and its associated factors in patients treated with TEM for HGD and T1 rectal tumors. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 79 patients who underwent TEM for rectal lesions at Rabin Medical Center-Hasharon Hospital from 2005 to 2019. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, and follow-up outcomes, with specific focus on tumor size, resection margins, mucin production, and distance from anal verge (AV). Separate and unified analyses were performed to assess the recurrence risk factors for both HGD and T1 patients. Results: Sixty-three patients were included in the final analysis. In the unified analysis, larger tumor size was significantly associated with increased recurrence risk (OR = 2.27, p = 0.028), and mucin production was a strong predictor of recurrence in the T1 group and combined analysis (p = 0.0012 and p = 0.014, respectively). Distance from AV demonstrated a borderline association with recurrence (p = 0.053). Conclusions: Larger tumor size and mucin production are significant predictors of recurrence in TEM-treated rectal polyps. Personalized follow-up and postoperative management are essential for patients with these risk factors to reduce the recurrence risk.

Local excision for middle-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation: A retrospective study from a single tertiary center

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer has become one of the leading malignancies threatening people's health. For locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), the comprehensive strategy combining neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT), total mesorectal excision (TME), and adjuvant chemotherapy has emerged as a standard treatment regimen, leading to favorable local control and long-term survival. However, in recent years, an increasing attention has been paid on the exploration of organ preservation strategies, aiming to enhance quality of life while maintaining optimal oncological treatment outcomes. Local excision (LE), compared with low anterior resection (LAR) or abdominal-perineal resection (APR) was introduced dating back to 1970's. LE has historically been linked to a heightened risk of recurrence compared to TME, potentially due to occult lymph node metastasis and intraluminal recurrence. Recent evidence has demonstrated that LE might be an alternative approach, instead of LAR or APR, in cases with favorable tumor regression after NCRT with potentially better quality of life. Therefore, a retrospective analysis of clinicopathological data from mid-low LARC patients who underwent LE after NCRT was conducted, aiming to evaluate the treatment's efficacy, safety, and oncologic prognosis.

AIM

To explore the safety, efficacy, and long-term prognosis of LE in patients with mid-low rectal cancer who had a good response to NCRT.

METHODS

Patients with LE between 2012 to 2021 were retrospectively collected from the rectal cancer database from Gastro-intestinal Ward III in Peking University Cancer Hospital. The clinicopathological features, postoperative complications, and long-term prognosis of these patients were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to create cancer-specific survival curve, and the log-rank test was used to compare the differences regarding outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients were included in this study. The median interval between NCRT and surgery was 25.4 (range: 8.7-164.4) weeks. The median operation time was 57 (20.0-137.0) minutes. The initial clinical T staging (cT): 9 (27.3%) patients were cT2, 19 (57.6%) patients were cT3, and 5 (15.2%) patients were cT4; The initial N staging (cN): 8 patients (24.2%) were cN negative, 25 patients (75.8%) were cN positive; The initial M stage (cM): 2 patients (6.1%) had distant metastasis (ycM1), 31 (93.9%) patients had no distant metastasis (cM0). The pathological results: 18 (54.5%) patients were pathological T0 stage (ypT0), 6 (18.2%) patients were ypT1, 7 (21.2%) patients were ypT2, and 2 (6.1%) patients were ypT3. For 9 cT2 patients, 5 (5/9, 55.6%) had a postoperative pathological result of ypT0. For 19 cT3 patients, 11 (57.9%) patients were ypT0, and 2 (40%) were ypT0 in 5 cT4 patients. The most common complication was chronic perineal pain (71.4%, 5/7), followed by bleeding (43%, 3/7), stenosis (14.3%, 1/7), and fecal incontinence (14.3%, 1/7). The median follow-up time was 42.0 (4.0-93.5) months. For 31 patients with cM0, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate, 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) rate, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate were 88.4%, 96.7%, and 92.9%, respectively. There were significant differences between the ycT groups concerning either DFS (P = 0.042) or OS (P = 0.002) in the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The LRFS curve of ycT ≤ T1 patients was better than that of ycT ≥ T2 patients, and the P value was very close to 0.05 (P = 0.070). The DFS curve of patients with ypT ≤ T1 was better than that of patients with ypT ≥ T2, but the P value was not statistically significant (P = 0.560). There was a significant difference between the ypT groups concerning OS (P = 0.014) in the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The LRFS curve of ypT ≤ T1 patients was better than that of ypT ≥ T2 patients, and the P value was very close to 0.05 (P = 0.070). Two patients with initial cM1 were alive at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

LE for rectal cancer with significant tumor regression after NCRT can obtain better safety, efficiency, and oncological outcome. Minimally invasive or nonsurgical treatment with patient participation in decision-making can be performed for highly selected patients. Further investigation from multiple centers will bring better understanding of potential advantages regarding local resection.

Short-term outcomes after primary total mesorectal excision (TME) versus local excision followed by completion TME for early rectal cancer: population-based propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening programmes have led to a shift towards early-stage colorectal cancer, which, in selected cases, can be treated using local excision. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision (two-stage approach) may be associated with less favourable outcomes than primary total mesorectal excision (one-stage approach). The aim of this population study was to determine the distribution of treatment strategies for early rectal cancer in the Netherlands and to compare the short-term outcomes of primary total mesorectal excision with those of local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

Short-term data for patients with cT1-2 N0xM0 rectal cancer who underwent local excision only, primary total mesorectal excision, or local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2020 in the Netherlands were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Patients were categorized according to treatment groups and logistic regressions were performed after multiple imputation and propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the end-ostomy rate.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2020, the proportion for the two-stage approach increased from 22.3% to 43.9%. After matching, 1062 patients were included. The end-ostomy rate was 16.8% for the primary total mesorectal excision group versus 29.6% for the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (P < 0.001). The primary total mesorectal excision group had a higher re-intervention rate than the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (16.7% versus 11.8%; P = 0.048). No differences were observed with regard to complications, conversion, diverting ostomies, radical resections, readmissions, and death.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that, over time, cT1-2 rectal cancer has increasingly been treated using the two-stage approach. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision seems to be associated with an elevated end-ostomy rate. It is important that clinicians and patients are aware of this risk during shared decision-making.

Risk Factors for Rectal Cancer Recurrence after Local Excision of T1 Lesions from a Decade-Long Multicenter Retrospective Study

Background: Local surgical excision of T1 rectal adenocarcinoma is a well-established approach. Yet, there are still open questions regarding the recurrence rates and its risk factors. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study including all patients who underwent local excision of early rectal cancer with an open or MIS approach and had a T1 lesion from 2010 to 2020 in six academic centers. Data included demographics, preoperative studies, surgical findings, postoperative outcomes, and local and systemic recurrence. A univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for recurrence. Results: Overall, 274 patients underwent local excision of rectal lesions. Of them, 97 (35.4%) patients with a T1 lesion were included in the cohort. The mean age was 69 ± 10.5 years, and 42 (43.3%) were female. The mean distance of the lesions from the anal verge was 7.8 ± 3.2 cm, and the average tumor size was 2.7 ± 1.6 cm. Eighty-two patients (85%) had a full-thickness resection. Eight patients (8%) had postoperative complications. Kikuchi classification of submucosal (SM) involvement was reported in 29 (30%) patients. Twelve patients had SM1, two SM2, and fifteen SM3. Following pathology, 24 patients (24.7%) returned for additional surgery or treatment. The overall recurrence rate was 14.4% (14 patients), with 11 patients having a local recurrence and 6 having a systemic metastatic recurrence, 3 of which had both. The mean time for recurrence was 2.78 ± 2.8 years and the overall mortality rate was 11%. On univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis of recurrence vs. non-recurrence groups, the strongest and most significant association and possible risk factors for recurrence were larger lesions (4.3 vs. 2.5 cm, p < 0.001) with an OR of 6.67 (CI-1.82-24.36), especially for tumors larger than 3.5 cm, mucinous histology (14.3% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.004, OR of 14.02, CI-1.13-173.85), and involved margins (41.7% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.003, OR of 9.59, CI-2.14-43.07). The open transanal excision (TAE) approach was also identified as a possible significant risk factor in univariant analysis, while SM3 level penetration showed only a trend. Conclusion: Surgical local excision of T1 rectal malignancy is a safe and viable option. Still, one in four patients received additional treatment. There is an almost 15% chance for recurrence, especially in large tumors, mucinous histology, or involved margin cases. These high-risk patients might warrant additional intervention and stricter surveillance protocols.

T1 colorectal cancer management in the era of minimally invasive endoscopic resection

T1 colorectal cancer (CRC), defined by tumor invasion confined to the submucosa, has historically been managed by surgery. Improved understanding of recurrence and lymph node metastases risk, coupled with advances in endoscopic resection techniques, have led to an increasing capacity for organ-sparing local excision. Minimally invasive management of T1 CRC begins with optical evaluation of the lesion to diagnose invasive disease and quantify depth of invasion, which informs therapeutic decision making. Modality selection between various available endoscopic resection techniques depends upon lesion characteristics, technique risk-benefit profiles, and location-specific implications. Following endoscopic resection, established histopathology features determine the risk of recurrence and subsequent management including surveillance or adjuvant surgical excision. The management of non-operative candidates deviates from conventional recommendations with emerging treatment strategies in select populations.

Predicting rectal cancer tumor budding grading based on MRI and CT with multimodal deep transfer learning: A dual-center study

Objective

To investigate the effectiveness of a multimodal deep learning model in predicting tumor budding (TB) grading in rectal cancer (RC) patients.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 355 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma from two different hospitals. Among them, 289 patients from our institution were randomly divided into an internal training cohort (n = 202) and an internal validation cohort (n = 87) in a 7:3 ratio, while an additional 66 patients from another hospital constituted an external validation cohort. Various deep learning models were constructed and compared for their performance using T1CE and CT-enhanced images, and the optimal models were selected for the creation of a multimodal fusion model. Based on single and multiple factor logistic regression, clinical N staging and fecal occult blood were identified as independent risk factors and used to construct the clinical model. A decision-level fusion was employed to integrate these two models to create an ensemble model. The predictive performance of each model was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), DeLong's test, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Model visualization Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) was performed for model interpretation.

Results

The multimodal fusion model demonstrated superior performance compared to single-modal models, with AUC values of 0.869 (95% CI: 0.761-0.976) for the internal validation cohort and 0.848 (95% CI: 0.721-0.975) for the external validation cohort. N-stage and fecal occult blood were identified as clinically independent risk factors through single and multivariable logistic regression analysis. The final ensemble model exhibited the best performance, with AUC values of 0.898 (95% CI: 0.820-0.975) for the internal validation cohort and 0.868 (95% CI: 0.768-0.968) for the external validation cohort.

Conclusion

Multimodal deep learning models can effectively and non-invasively provide individualized predictions for TB grading in RC patients, offering valuable guidance for treatment selection and prognosis assessment.

Treatment Options for Distal Rectal Cancer in the Era of Organ Preservation

OPINION STATEMENT

The introduction of total mesorectal excision into the radical surgery of rectal cancer has significantly improved the oncological outcome with longer survival and lower local recurrence. Traditional treatment modalities of distal rectal cancer, relying on radical surgery, while effective, take their own set of risks, including surgical complications, potential damage to the anus, and surrounding structure owing to the pursuit of thorough resection. The progress of operating methods as well as the integration of systemic therapies and radiotherapy into the peri-operative period, particularly the exciting clinical complete response of patients after neoadjuvant treatment, have paved the way for organ preservation strategy. The non-inferiority oncological outcome of "watch and wait" compared with radical surgery underscores the potential of organ preservation not only to control local recurrence but also to reduce the need for treatments followed by structure destruction, hopefully improving the long-term quality of life. Radical radiotherapy provides another treatment option for patients unwilling or unable to undergo surgery. Organ preservation points out the direction of treatment for distal rectal cancer, while additional researches are needed to answer remaining questions about its optimal use.

Management after non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer

Since the introduction of population-based screening, increasing numbers of T1 rectal cancers are detected and removed by local endoscopic resection. Patients can be cured with endoscopic resection alone, but there is a possibility of residual tumor cells remaining after the initial resection. These can be located intraluminally at the resection site or extraluminally in the form of (lymph node) metastases. To decrease the risk of residual cells progressing towards more advanced disease, additional treatment is usually needed. However, with the currently available risk stratification models, it remains challenging to determine who should and should not be further treated after non-curative endoscopic resection. In this review, the different management strategies for patients with non-curatively treated T1 rectal cancers are discussed, along with the available evidence for each strategy and relevant considerations for clinical decision making. Furthermore, we provide practical guidance on the management and surveillance following non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer.

Patient educational videos on T1 colorectal cancer

Video 1Colorectal cancer: how does it develop and how can you detect it? Video 2A polyp suspected to be colorectal cancer: what now? Video 3Early-stage colon cancer with unfavorable features: what now?

Outcome of Completion Surgery after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer Patients

T1 colorectal cancers (T1CRC) are increasingly being treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). After ESD of a T1CRC, completion surgery is indicated in a subgroup of patients. Currently, the influence of ESD on surgical morbidity and mortality is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare 90-day morbidity and mortality of completion surgery after ESD to primary surgery. The completion surgery group consisted of suspected T1CRC patients from a multicenter prospective ESD database (2014-2020). The primary surgery group consisted of pT1CRC patients from a nationwide surgical registry (2017-2019). Patients with rectal or sigmoidal cancers were selected. Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Propensity score adjustment was used to correct for confounders. In total, 411 patients were included: 54 in the completion surgery group (39 pT1, 15 pT2) and 357 in the primary surgery group with pT1CRC. Adverse event rate was 24.1% after completion surgery and 21.3% after primary surgery. After completion surgery 90-day mortality did not occur, though one patient died in the primary surgery group. After propensity score adjustment, lymph node yield did not differ significantly between the groups. Among other morbidity-related outcomes, stoma rate (OR 1.298 95%-CI 0.587-2.872, p = 0.519) and adverse event rate (OR 1.162; 95%-CI 0.570-2.370, p = 0.679) also did not differ significantly. A subgroup analysis was performed in patients undergoing rectal surgery. In this subgroup (37 completion and 136 primary surgery), these morbidity outcomes also did not differ significantly. In conclusion, this study suggests that ESD does not compromise morbidity or 90-day mortality of completion surgery.

[Transanal Tumor Resection: Indication, Surgical Technique and Management of Complications]

Transanal resection procedures are special operations for the minimally invasive treatment of rectal tumours. Apart from benign tumours, this procedure is suitable for the excision of low-risk T1 rectal carcinomas, if these can be completely removed (R0 resection). With stringent patient selection, very good oncological results are achieved. Various international trials are currently evaluating whether local resection procedures are oncologically sufficient if there is a complete or near complete response after neoadjuvant radio-/chemotherapy. Numerous studies have shown that the functional results and the postoperative quality of life after local resection are excellent, especially considering the well-known functional deficits of alternative operations, such as low anterior or abdominoperineal resection.Severe complications are very rare. Most complications, such as urinary retention or subfebrile temperatures, are minor in nature. Suture line dehiscences are usually clinically unremarkable. Major complications comprise significant haemorrhage and the opening of the peritoneal cavity. The latter must be recognized intraoperatively and can usually be managed by primary suture. Infection, abscess formation, rectovaginal fistula, injury of the prostate or even urethra are extremely rare complications.