2
|
Li R, Wang Q, Zhang B, Yuan Y, Xie W, Huang X, Zhou C, Zhang S, Niu S, Chang H, Chen D, Miao H, Zeng ZF, Xiao W, Gao Y. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by resection/ablation in stage IV rectal cancer patients with potentially resectable metastases. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:1333. [PMID: 34906114 PMCID: PMC8672531 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-09089-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2021] [Accepted: 12/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The optimal treatment of stage IV rectal cancer remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess the treatment outcomes and toxicity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by local treatment of all tumor sites and subsequent adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IV rectal cancer patients with potentially resectable metastases. Methods Adult patients diagnosed with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma with potentially resectable metastases, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy from July 2013 and September 2019 at Sun Yat-sen University cancer center, were included. Completion of the whole treatment schedule, pathological response, treatment-related toxicity and survival were evaluated. Results A total of 228 patients were analyzed with a median follow-up of 33 (range 3.3 to 93.4) months. Eventually, 112 (49.1%) patients finished the whole treatment schedule, of which complete response of all tumor sites and pathological downstaging of the rectal tumor were observed in three (2.7%) and 90 (80.4%) patients. The three-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of all patients were 56.6% (50.2 to 63.9%) and 38.6% (95% CI 32.5 to 45.8%), respectively. For patients who finished the treatment schedule, 3-year OS (74.4% vs 39.2%, P < 0.001) and 3-year PFS (45.5% vs 30.5%, P = 0.004) were significantly improved compared those who did not finish the treatment. Grade 3–4 chem-radiotherapy treatment toxicities were observed in 51 (22.4%) of all patients and surgical complications occurred in 22 (9.6%) of 142 patients who underwent surgery, respectively. Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by resection/ablation and subsequent adjuvant chemotherapy offered chances of long-term survival with tolerable toxicities for selected patients with potentially resectable stage IV rectal cancer, and could be considered as an option in clinical practice. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-09089-5.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rongzhen Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Qiaoxuan Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Bin Zhang
- Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Yan Yuan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Weihao Xie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaoxue Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Chengjing Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Shu Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Shaoqing Niu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Hui Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Dongni Chen
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,Department of Thoracic Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Huikai Miao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,Department of Thoracic Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhi Fan Zeng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China
| | - Weiwei Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China. .,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
| | - Yuanhong Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China. .,State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Moslim MA, Bastawrous AL, Jeyarajah DR. Neoadjuvant Pelvic Radiotherapy in the Management of Rectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: Is It Worth It? J Gastrointest Surg 2021; 25:2411-2422. [PMID: 34100244 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-021-05042-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2021] [Accepted: 05/12/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of neoadjuvant pelvic radiotherapy was a major advance in oncologic care for locally advanced rectal cancer in the twentieth century. The extrapolation of the care of locally advanced rectal cancer to the management of rectal cancer with treatable liver metastases is controversial. The aim of this review is to examine the available data on the role of pelvic radiotherapy and chemoradiation in the setting of treatable metastatic liver disease. METHODS A systematic search of MEDLINE was performed to report the landmark randomized controlled trials between 1993 and 2021. RESULTS Attaining liver clearance and total mesorectal excision with R0 margin remains the mainstay of cure. There is uncertainty regarding the sequencing of treatment. The literature lacks randomized clinical trials comparing the rectal first, liver first, interval strategy, and simultaneous surgical approaches. A multidisciplinary discussion regarding the utility of radiotherapy is emphasized to achieve the goals of treatment. Short-course radiotherapy has proved comparable disease-control outcomes to long-course chemoradiation with a significantly improved cost-performance. The implementation of short-course radiotherapy in the interval strategy and simultaneous surgical approach is promising. Neoadjuvant pelvic radiotherapy can be omitted in patients with metastatic rectal cancer if adequate margin clearance is achievable. CONCLUSION The use of radiotherapy in metastatic rectal cancer is popular but is based on limited data. Treatment should be tailored to the local extent of rectal cancer and priority of liver metastasis management. The optimal treatment strategy in patients with rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastatic disease needs to be studied in randomized trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maitham A Moslim
- Methodist Richardson Medical Center, 2805 E. President George Bush Highway, Richardson, TX, USA
| | | | - D Rohan Jeyarajah
- Methodist Richardson Medical Center, 2805 E. President George Bush Highway, Richardson, TX, USA. .,TCU/UNTHSC School of Medicine, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhao B, Gabriel RA, Vaida F, Lopez NE, Eisenstein S, Clary BM. Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Rectal Cancer: a Machine Learning Approach. J Gastrointest Surg 2020; 24:1165-1172. [PMID: 31468331 PMCID: PMC7048666 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-019-04373-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2019] [Accepted: 08/13/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A significant proportion of patients with rectal cancer will present with synchronous metastasis at the time of diagnosis. Overall survival (OS) for these patients are highly variable and previous attempts to build predictive models often have low predictive power, with concordance indexes (c-index) less than 0.70. METHODS Using the National Cancer Database (2010-2014), we identified patients with synchronous metastatic rectal cancer. The data was split into a training dataset (diagnosis years 2010-2012), which was used to build the machine learning model, and a testing dataset (diagnosis years 2013-2014), which was used to externally validate the model. A nomogram predicting 3-year OS was created using Cox proportional hazard regression with lasso penalization. Predictors were selected based on clinical significance and availability in NCDB. Performance of the machine learning model was assessed by c-index. RESULTS A total of 4098 and 3107 patients were used to construct and validate the nomogram, respectively. Internally validated c-indexes at 1, 2, and 3 years were 0.816 (95% CI 0.813-0.818), 0.789 (95% CI 0.786-0.790), and 0.778 (95% CI 0.775-0.780), respectively. External validated c-indexes at 1, 2, and 3 years were 0.811, 0.779, and 0.778, respectively. CONCLUSIONS There is wide variability in the OS for patients with metastatic rectal cancer, making accurate predictions difficult. However, using machine learning techniques, more accurate models can be built. This will aid patients and clinicians in setting expectations and making clinical decisions in this group of challenging patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beiqun Zhao
- Department of Surgery, University of California San
Diego
| | | | - Florin Vaida
- Department of Family Medicine and Public Health,
University of California San Diego
| | | | | | - Bryan M. Clary
- Department of Surgery, University of California San
Diego
| |
Collapse
|