Results of Neoadjuvant Short-Course Radiation Therapy Followed by Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for T1-T2 N0 Extraperitoneal Rectal Cancer

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.

Whether the watch-and-wait strategy has application value for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy? A network meta-analysis

The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety between the watch-and-wait strategy (WW), radical surgery (RS), and local excision (LE) for rectal cancer with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nCRT). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinical trials to compare WW with RS and LE for patients with cCR until March 2023 and collected the following data: local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), cancer-related death (CRD), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). In total, 2240 patients from 21 studies were included. Pairwise meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups in terms of CRD and 2-, 3-, and 5-year OS (P < 0.05). The RS group was significantly better than the WW group in terms of the LR rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.12, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.21, P < 0.001, I2 = 0 %], 3-year DFS (OR = 1.56, 95 % CI: 1.10-2.21, P = 0.01, I2 = 38 %), and 5-year DFS (OR = 2.30, 95 % CI: 1.53-3.46, P < 0.001, I2 = 34 %). The results of network meta-analysis were also similar. After sensitivity analysis, the 5-year OS of the RS group was significantly better than that of the WW group (OR = 2.77, 95 % CI: 1.28-6.00, P = 0.009, I2 = 33 %). Nevertheless, neither regression analysis nor subgroup analysis provided meaningful results. However, the cumulative meta-analysis of LR, DM, and 3- and 5-year DFS revealed significant turning points (P < 0.05). Our meta-analysis recommends using the WW strategy for patients with cCR having poor underlying conditions and high surgical risk; however, there is a risk of higher LR and worse survival after 3 years.

Radiation Therapy Changed the Second Malignancy Pattern in Rectal Cancer Survivors

Background and Objectives: Radiotherapy (RT) plays an important role in the treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer patients. It can bring radio exposure together with the survival benefit. Cancer survivors are generally at an increased risk for second malignancies, and survivors receiving RT may have higher risks than survivors not receiving RT. Whether the risk of an all-site second malignancy may increase after RT is still debated. This study aims to compare the second malignancy pattern in rectal cancer survivors after RT. Materials and Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used for analysis. In total, 49,961 rectal cancer patients (20-84 years of age) were identified between 2000 and 2012 from 18 SEER registries. All patients underwent surgery. The occurrence of second malignancies diagnosed after rectal cancer diagnosis was compared in patients who received and did not receive RT. The standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used. SEER*Stat was used to generate the 95% CIs for the SIR statistics using the exact method. Results: Of the total 49,961 patients, 5582 developed second malignancies. For all-site second primary malignancies, the age-adjusted SIRs were 1.14 (95% CI 1.1-1.18) and 1.00 (95% CI 0.96-1.04) in the no RT and RT groups, respectively. In 23,192 patients from the surgery-only group, 2604 had second malignancies, and in 26,769 patients who received RT, 2978 developed second malignancies. With respect to every site, the risk of secondary prostate cancer was significantly lower in the RT group (SIR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.33-0.46) than that in the surgery-only group (SIR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.96-1.12). Moreover, the risk of thyroid cancer was significantly higher in the RT group (SIR = 2.80, 95% CI 2.2-3.51) than that in the surgery-only group (SIR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.99-1.66). Conclusions: RT may change the second malignancy pattern in rectal cancer survivors; the risk of prostate cancer decreased, and the risk of thyroid cancer increased most significantly.

Geriatric Radiation Oncology: What We Know and What Can We Do Better?

Elderly patients represent a growing subgroup of cancer patients for whom the role of radiation therapy is poorly defined. Older patients are still clearly underrepresented in clinical trials, resulting in very limited high-level evidence. Moreover, elderly patients are less likely to receive radiation therapy in similar clinical scenarios compared to younger patients. However, there is no clear evidence for a generally reduced radiation tolerance with increasing age. Modern radiation techniques have clearly reduced acute and late side effects, thus extending the boundaries of the possible regarding treatment intensity in elderly or frail patients. Hypofractionated regimens have further decreased the socioeconomic burden of radiation treatments by reducing the overall treatment time. The current review aims at summarizing the existing data for the use of radiation therapy or chemoradiation in elderly patients focusing on the main cancer types. It provides an overview of treatment tolerability and outcomes with current standard radiation therapy regimens, including possible predictive factors in the elderly population. Strategies for patient selection for standard or tailored radiation therapy approaches based on age, performance score or comorbidity, including the use of prediction tests or geriatric assessments, are discussed. Current and future possibilities for improvements of routine care and creation of high-level evidence in elderly patients receiving radiation therapy are highlighted.

Short-term outcomes of chemoradiotherapy and local excision versus total mesorectal excision in T2-T3ab,N0,M0 rectal cancer: a multicentre randomised, controlled, phase III trial (the TAU-TEM study)

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of T2-T3ab,N0,M0 rectal cancers is total mesorectal excision (TME) due to the high recurrence rates recorded with local excision. Initial reports of the combination of pre-operative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) have shown reductions in local recurrence. The TAU-TEM study aims to demonstrate the non-inferiority of local recurrence and the improvement in morbidity achieved with CRT-TEM compared with TME. Here we describe morbidity rates and pathological outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial including patients with rectal adenocarcinoma staged as T2-T3ab,N0,M0. Patients were randomised to the CRT-TEM or the TME group. Patients included, tolerance of CRT and its adverse effects, surgical complications (Clavien-Dindo and Comprehensive Complication Index classifications) and pathological results (complete response in the CRT-TEM group) were recorded in both groups. Patients attended follow-up controls for local and systemic relapse.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01308190.

RESULTS

From July 2010 to October 2021, 173 patients from 17 Spanish hospitals were included (CRT-TEM: 86, TME: 87). Eleven were excluded after randomisation (CRT-TEM: 5, TME: 6). Modified intention-to-treat analysis thus included 81 patients in each group. There was no mortality after CRT. In the CRT-TEM group, one patient abandoned CRT, 1/81 (1.2%). The CRT-related morbidity rate was 29.6% (24/81). Post-operative morbidity was 17/82 (20.7%) in the CRT-TEM group and 41/81 (50.6%) in the TME group (P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval 42.9% to 16.7%). One patient died in each group (1.2%). Of the 81 patients in the CRT-TEM group who received the allocated treatment, 67 (82.7%) underwent organ preservation. Pathological complete response in the CRT-TEM group was 44.3% (35/79). In the TME group, pN1 were found in 17/81 (21%).

CONCLUSION

CRT-TEM treatment obtains high pathological complete response rates (44.3%) and a high CRT compliance rate (98.8%). Post-operative complications and hospitalisation rates were significantly lower than those in the TME group. We await the results of the follow-up regarding cancer outcomes and quality of life.

Quality-of-life outcomes in older patients with early-stage rectal cancer receiving organ-preserving treatment with hypofractionated short-course radiotherapy followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TREC): non-randomised registry of patients unsuitable for total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

Older patients with early-stage rectal cancer are under-represented in clinical trials and, therefore, little high-quality data are available to guide treatment in this patient population. The TREC trial was a randomised, open-label feasibility study conducted at 21 centres across the UK that compared organ preservation through short-course radiotherapy (SCRT; 25 Gy in five fractions) plus transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) with standard total mesorectal excision in adults with stage T1-2 rectal adenocarcinoma (maximum diameter ≤30 mm) and no lymph node involvement or metastasis. TREC incorporated a non-randomised registry offering organ preservation to patients who were considered unsuitable for total mesorectal excision by the local colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team. Organ preservation was achieved in 56 (92%) of 61 non-randomised registry patients with local recurrence-free survival of 91% (95% CI 84-99) at 3 years. Here, we report acute and long-term patient-reported outcomes from this non-randomised registry group.

METHODS

Patients considered by the local colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team to be at high risk of complications from total mesorectal excision on the basis of frailty, comorbidities, and older age were included in a non-randomised registry to receive organ-preserving treatment. These patients were invited to complete questionnaires on patient-reported outcomes (the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life [EORTC-QLQ] questionnaire core module [QLQ-C30] and colorectal cancer module [QLQ-CR29], the Colorectal Functional Outcome [COREFO] questionnaire, and EuroQol-5 Dimensions-3 Level [EQ-5D-3L]) at baseline and at months 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 postoperatively. To aid interpretation, data from patients in the non-randomised registry were compared with data from those patients in the TREC trial who had been randomly assigned to organ-preserving therapy, and an additional reference cohort of aged-matched controls from the UK general population. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN14422743, and is closed.

FINDINGS

Between July 21, 2011, and July 15, 2015, 88 patients were enrolled onto the TREC study to undergo organ preservation, of whom 27 (31%) were randomly allocated to organ-preserving therapy and 61 (69%) were added to the non-randomised registry for organ-preserving therapy. Non-randomised patients were older than randomised patients (median age 74 years [IQR 67-80] vs 65 years [61-71]). Organ-preserving treatment was well tolerated among patients in the non-randomised registry, with mild worsening of fatigue; quality of life; physical, social, and role functioning; and bowel function 3 months postoperatively compared with baseline values. By 6-12 months, most scores had returned to baseline values, and were indistinguishable from data from the reference cohort. Only mild symptoms of faecal incontinence and urgency, equivalent to less than one episode per week, persisted at 36 months among patients in both groups.

INTERPRETATION

The SCRT and TEM organ-preservation approach was well tolerated in older and frailer patients, showed good rates of organ preservation, and was associated with low rates of acute and long-term toxicity, with minimal effects on quality of life and functional status. Our findings support the adoption of this approach for patients considered to be at high risk from radical surgery.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Total Mesorectal Excision vs. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Followed by Radiotherapy for T2N0M0 Distal Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Trial

Introduction

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is an organ-preserving treatment alternative for patients with early rectal cancer. However, TEM alone is associated with greater risk of local recurrence and inferior survival in comparison with total meso-rectal excision (TME). As an important adjuvant therapy, radiotherapy can effectively reduce the local recurrence rate of rectal cancer. This study aimed to investigate whether TEM followed by radiotherapy can be a valid alternative to TME in T2N0M0 distal rectal cancer treatment.

Methods

We plan to recruit 168 participants meeting established inclusion criteria. Following informed consent, participants will randomly receive treatment protocols of TEM followed by radiotherapy (a total dose of 45–50.4 Gy given in 25–28 factions) or TME. Depending on post-operative pathology, the participants will receive either long-term follow-up or further treatment. The primary endpoint of this trial is 3-year local recurrence rate. The secondary end points include 3-year disease-free survival rate, 3-year overall survival rate, 3-year mortality rate, post-operative quality of life, post-operative safety index, intraoperative evaluation index and post-operative short-term evaluation index.

Discussion

This trial is the first prospective randomized trial to investigate the rectum preserving treatment by using transanal local excision followed by radiotherapy.

Clinical trial registration

The trial was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04098471 on September 20, 2019.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

Radical surgery versus organ preservation via short-course radiotherapy followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early-stage rectal cancer (TREC): a randomised, open-label feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Radical surgery via total mesorectal excision might not be the optimal first-line treatment for early-stage rectal cancer. An organ-preserving strategy with selective total mesorectal excision could reduce the adverse effects of treatment without substantially compromising oncological outcomes. We investigated the feasibility of recruiting patients to a randomised trial comparing an organ-preserving strategy with total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

TREC was a randomised, open-label feasibility study done at 21 tertiary referral centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older with rectal adenocarcinoma, staged T2 or lower, with a maximum diameter of 30 mm or less; patients with lymph node involvement or metastases were excluded. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by use of a computer-based randomisation service to undergo organ preservation with short-course radiotherapy followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery after 8-10 weeks, or total mesorectal excision. Where the transanal endoscopic microsurgery specimen showed histopathological features associated with an increased risk of local recurrence, patients were considered for planned early conversion to total mesorectal excision. A non-randomised prospective registry captured patients for whom randomisation was considered inappropriate, because of a strong clinical indication for one treatment group. The primary endpoint was cumulative randomisation at 12, 18, and 24 months. Secondary outcomes evaluated safety, efficacy, and health-related quality of life assessed with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ C30 and CR29 in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN14422743.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 22, 2012, and Dec 19, 2014, 55 patients were randomly assigned at 15 sites; 27 to organ preservation and 28 to radical surgery. Cumulatively, 18 patients had been randomly assigned at 12 months, 31 at 18 months, and 39 at 24 months. No patients died within 30 days of initial treatment, but one patient randomly assigned to organ preservation died within 6 months following conversion to total mesorectal excision with anastomotic leakage. Eight (30%) of 27 patients randomly assigned to organ preservation were converted to total mesorectal excision. Serious adverse events were reported in four (15%) of 27 patients randomly assigned to organ preservation versus 11 (39%) of 28 randomly assigned to total mesorectal excision (p=0·04, χ2 test). Serious adverse events associated with organ preservation were most commonly due to rectal bleeding or pain following transanal endoscopic microsurgery (reported in three cases). Radical total mesorectal excision was associated with medical and surgical complications including anastomotic leakage (two patients), kidney injury (two patients), cardiac arrest (one patient), and pneumonia (two patients). Histopathological features that would be considered to be associated with increased risk of tumour recurrence if observed after transanal endoscopic microsurgery alone were present in 16 (59%) of 27 patients randomly assigned to organ preservation, versus 24 (86%) of 28 randomly assigned to total mesorectal excision (p=0·03, χ2 test). Eight (30%) of 27 patients assigned to organ preservation achieved a complete response to radiotherapy. Patients who were randomly assigned to organ preservation showed improvements in patient-reported bowel toxicities and quality of life and function scores in multiple items compared to those who were randomly assigned to total mesorectal excision, which were sustained over 36 months' follow-up. The non-randomised registry comprised 61 patients who underwent organ preservation and seven who underwent radical surgery. Non-randomised patients who underwent organ preservation were older than randomised patients and more likely to have life-limiting comorbidities. Serious adverse events occurred in ten (16%) of 61 non-randomised patients who underwent organ preservation versus one (14%) of seven who underwent total mesorectal excision. 24 (39%) of 61 non-randomised patients who underwent organ preservation had high-risk histopathological features, while 25 (41%) of 61 achieved a complete response. Overall, organ preservation was achieved in 19 (70%) of 27 randomised patients and 56 (92%) of 61 non-randomised patients.

INTERPRETATION

Short-course radiotherapy followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery achieves high levels of organ preservation, with relatively low morbidity and indications of improved quality of life. These data support the use of organ preservation for patients considered unsuitable for primary total mesorectal excision due to the short-term risks associated with this surgery, and support further evaluation of short-course radiotherapy to achieve organ preservation in patients considered fit for total mesorectal excision. Larger randomised studies, such as the ongoing STAR-TREC study, are needed to more precisely determine oncological outcomes following different organ preservation treatment schedules.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Quality of Life After Radiotherapy for Rectal and Anal Cancer

Purpose of Review

With advances in radiation therapy (RT) techniques for rectal and anal cancers allowing for the modulation of critical normal tissues, there has been an increased emphasis on improving the quality of life (QOL) of cancer survivors. Herein, we review the literature to examine the impact of RT on QOL and patient reported outcomes (PROs) to better inform providers about the challenges of survivorship.

Recent Findings

Large systematic reviews, recent studies and long-term follow-up of pivotal clinical trials have shown that RT impacts QOL, particularly fecal continence and sexual function. Modern preoperative RT techniques allow for decreased dose to organs-at-risk will likely improve QOL.

Summary

RT, though critical in the treatment of rectal and anal cancer, has a profound impact on QOL for some patients. Recent studies have included PROs and validated QOL metrics to better inform providers and patients.

Systematic review of functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery: a word of caution

PURPOSE

The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are scarce and controversial. This systematic review sought to synthesize fecal continence, QoL, and manometric outcomes after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted searching for articles reporting on functional outcomes after TEM or TAMIS between January 1995 and June 2018. The evaluated outcome parameters were pre- and postoperative fecal continence (primary endpoint), QoL, and manometric results. Data were extracted using the same scales and measurement units as from the original study.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies comprising 1297 patients were included. Fecal continence outcomes were evaluated in 23 (79%) studies with a wide variety of assessment tools and divergent results. Ten studies (34%) analyzed QoL changes, and manometric variables were assessed in 15 studies (51%). Most studies reported some deterioration in manometric scores without major QoL impairment. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, it was not possible to perform any pooled analysis or meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These techniques do not seem to affect continence by themselves except in minor cases. The possibility of worsened function after TEM and TAMIS should not be underestimated. There is a need to homogenize or standardize functional and manometric outcomes assessment after TEM or TAMIS.

Individual participant data pooled-analysis of risk factors for recurrence after neoadjuvant radiotherapy and transanal local excision of rectal cancer: the PARTTLE study

BACKGROUND

An organ-preserving strategy may be a valid alternative in the treatment of selected patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Preoperative assessment of the risk for tumor recurrence is a key component of surgical planning. The aim of the present study was to increase the current knowledge on the risk factors for tumor recurrence.

METHODS

The present study included individual participant data of published studies on rectal cancer surgery. The literature was reviewed according to according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data checklist (PRISMA-IPD) guidelines. Series of patients, whose data were collected prospectively, having neoadjuvant radiotherapy followed by transanal local excision for rectal cancer were reviewed. Three independent series of univariate/multivariate binary logistic regression models were estimated for the risk of local, systemic and overall recurrence, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 15 studies, and 7 centers provided individual data on 517 patients. The multivariate analysis showed higher local and overall recurrences for ypT3 stage (OR 4.79; 95% CI 2.25-10.16 and OR 6.43 95% CI 3.33-12.42), tumor size after radiotherapy > 10 mm (OR 5.86 95% CI 2.33-14.74 and OR 3.14 95% CI 1.68-5.87), and lack of combined chemotherapy (OR 3.68 95% CI 1.78-7.62 and OR 2.09 95% CI 1.10-3.97), while ypT3 was the only factor correlated with systemic recurrence (OR 5.93). The analysis of survival curves shows that the overall survival is associated with ypT and not with cT.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision should be offered with caution after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to selected patients with rectal cancers, who achieved a good response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

For Patients with Early Rectal Cancer, Does Local Excision Have an Impact on Recurrence, Survival, and Quality of Life Relative to Radical Resection?

BACKGROUND

The most appropriate treatment for early-stage rectal cancers is controversial. The advantages of local excision regarding morbidity and function must be weighed against poorer oncologic efficacy. This study aimed to clarify further the role for local excision in the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases was conducted. Relevant studies were selected using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data addressing five key questions about outcomes of local versus radical resection of rectal cancer were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 16 studies identified by this study were mostly retrospective, and none were randomized. Local excision was associated with fewer complications and better functional outcome than radical resection. Of 12 studies evaluating local recurrence, 6 showed a higher local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision. Two additional studies showed no increase in local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision of T1 lesions but a significantly higher local recurrence rate among those who underwent local excision of T2 lesions. High histologic grade, angiolymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, and depth within submucosa were features associated with a higher risk of local recurrence. In 7 of 15 studies, long-term survival was reduced compared with that of patients who underwent radical resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local excision for early-stage rectal cancer is associated with increased local recurrence and decreased overall survival compared with radical resection, local excision may be appropriate for select individuals who have T1 tumors with no adverse pathologic features.

Short course radiation therapy for rectal cancer in the elderly: can radical surgery be avoided?

Rectal cancer in elderly patients can be difficult to manage. Short course radiation therapy (SCRT) has shown to be effective when given immediately prior to surgery. Here we report outcomes of elderly patients who underwent SCRT either alone or prior to resection. Between 2010 and 2015, elderly patients with rectal cancer and no distant metastatic disease were identified. Symptoms at diagnosis, therapies, toxicities, and pathologic and clinical response were recorded from patient charts. The SCRT prescription dose was 5 Gy ×5 to the rectal tumor and 4 Gy ×5 to the mesorectum, omitting the iliac nodes. Twenty patients were identified with median age of 85 years (range, 71-93 years). No patient received systemic therapy. Sixty percent of patients were cT3 at diagnosis. Half underwent resection post SCRT and half received SCRT as definitive therapy. The 1- and 2-year overall survival was 75% and 54%. Overall survival did not differ between patients treated with SCRT and surgery compared to SCRT alone (P=0.8). Of the 10 surgical patients, 3 had a complete pathologic response at time of resection and 3 patients died within 2 weeks due to perioperative complications. Of patients treated with SCRT alone, 8 were symptomatic at presentation and 5 had a clinician defined symptomatic response. No patient treated with SCRT monotherapy required additional palliative measures for outflow obstruction, but 2 progressed locally and died. SCRT is well tolerated, results in pathologic complete responses in a small percentage of patients, and achieves 63% symptom improvement rate as monotherapy. A high peri-operative complication rate was observed in this small series. In elderly patients, SCRT as initial treatment with a watch and wait approach for surgery is feasible and should be evaluated prospectively.

Neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent treatment in rectal cancer: balance between oncological and functional outcomes

Current practice of neoadjuvant therapy and total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer bears the weakness in systemic disease control and long-term functional outcomes. With increasing concerns of the balance between cure and quality of life, new strategies are developed to better oncological outcomes at least cost of function damage. Attractive options to adjust neoadjuvant modality include escalation of radiotherapy, intensification of chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy with consolidation or full-course chemotherapy. Subsequently, organ-preserving strategies have gained the popularity. Surgical or nonsurgical approaches that spare the rectum are used as possible alternatives for radical surgery, though high-quality TME remains the last resort to offer reliable local disease control. This review discusses new strategies of neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent management, with a specific focus on the balance between oncological and functional outcomes.

Preoperative radiotherapy and local excision of rectal cancer: Long-term results of a randomised study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

It is uncertain whether local control is acceptable after preoperative radiotherapy and local excision (LE). An optimal preoperative dose/fractionation schedule has not yet been established.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a phase III study, patients with cT1-2N0M0 or borderline cT2/T3N0M0 < 4 cm rectal adenocarcinomas were randomised to receive either 5 × 5 Gy plus 1 × 4 Gy boost or chemoradiation: 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions plus 3 × 1.8 Gy boost and 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin bolus. LE was performed 6-8 weeks later. Patients with ypT0-1R0 disease were observed. Completion total mesorectal excision (CTME) was recommended for poor responders, i.e. ypT1R1/ypT2-3.

RESULTS

Of 61 randomised patients, 10 were excluded leaving 51 for analysis; 29 in the short-course group and 22 in the chemoradiation group. YpT0-1R0 was observed in 66% of patients in the short-course group and in 86% in the chemoradiation group, p = 0.11. CTME was performed only in 46% of patients with ypT1R1/ypT2-3. The median follow-up was 8.7 years. Local recurrence incidences and overall survival at 10 years were respectively for the short-course group vs. the chemoradiation group 35% vs. 5%, p = 0.036 and 47% vs. 86%, p = 0.009. In total, local recurrence at 10 years was 79% for ypT1R1/T2-3 without CTME.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial suggests that in the LE setting, both local recurrence and survival are worse after short-course radiotherapy than after chemoradiation. Because of the risk of bias, a confirmatory study is desirable. Lack of CTME is associated with an unacceptably high local recurrence rate.

Local excision for rectal cancer: a minimally invasive option

Transanal excision (TAE) with conventional retractors and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) are two well established minimally invasive surgical options for the treatment of selected rectal cancers. TEM is nowadays considered the standard of care for the transanal excision of rectal tumors, since it is associated with significantly better quality of excision and lower rates of recurrence than TAE. When compared with rectal resection and total mesorectal excision, TEM has lower postoperative morbidity and better functional outcomes, with similar long-term survival rates in selected early rectal cancers. More recently, transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) has been developed as an alternative to TEM. Possible benefits of TAMIS are under evaluation.

Decision-Making Strategy for Rectal Cancer Management Using Radiation Therapy for Elderly or Comorbid Patients

Rectal cancer predominantly affects patients older than 70 years, with peak incidence at age 80 to 85 years. However, the standard treatment paradigm for rectal cancer oftentimes cannot be feasibly applied to these patients owing to frailty or comorbid conditions. There are currently little information and no treatment guidelines to help direct therapy for patients who are elderly and/or have significant comorbidities, because most are not included or specifically studied in clinical trials. More recently various alternative treatment options have been brought to light that may potentially be utilized in this group of patients. This critical review examines the available literature on alternative therapies for rectal cancer and proposes a treatment algorithm to help guide clinicians in treatment decision making for elderly and comorbid patients.

Non-inferiority multicenter prospective randomized controlled study of rectal cancer T2-T3s (superficial) N0, M0 undergoing neoadjuvant treatment and local excision (TEM) vs total mesorectal excision (TME)

PURPOSE

The standard treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma is total mesorectal excision (TME), in many cases requires a temporary or permanent stoma. TME is associated with high morbidity and genitourinary alterations. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) allows access to tumors up to 20 cm from the anal verge, achieves minimal postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, and does not require an ostomy. The treatment of T2, N0, and M0 cancers remains controversial. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in association with TEM reduces local recurrence and increases survival. The TAU-TEM study aims to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the oncological outcomes and the improvement in morbidity and quality of life achieved with TEM compared with TME.

METHODS

Prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial includes patients with rectal adenocarcinoma less than 10 cm from the anal verge and up to 4 cm in size, staged as T2 or T3-superficial N0-M0. Patients will be randomized to two areas: CRT plus TEM or radical surgery (TME). Postoperative morbidity and mortality will be recorded and patients will complete the quality of life questionnaires before the start of treatment, after CRT in the CRT/TEM arm, and 6 months after surgery in both arms. The estimated sample size for the study is 173 patients. Patients will attend follow-up controls for local and systemic relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

This study aims to demonstrate the preservation of the rectum after preoperative CRT and TEM in rectal cancer stages T2-3s, N0, M0 and to determine the ability of this strategy to avoid the need for radical surgery (TME).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01308190. Número de registro del Comité de Etica e Investigación Clínica (CEIC) del Hospital universitario Parc Taulí: TAU-TEM-2009-01.

Local Excision and Endoscopic Resections for Early Rectal Cancer

Radical surgery is considered as the standard treatment for rectal cancer. Transanal local excision has been considered an interesting alternative for the management of selected patients with rectal cancers for many decades. Different approaches had been considered for local excision, from endoscopic submucosal dissection to resections using platforms, such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or transanal minimally invasive surgery. Identifying the ideal candidate for this approach is crucial, as a local failure after local excision is associated with poor outcomes, even for an initial early rectal tumor. In this article, the diagnostic tools and criteria to select patients for local excision, the different modalities used, and the outcomes are discussed.

New Strategies in Rectal Cancer

In recent years, our understanding of rectal cancer has improved, including how locally advanced disease responds to chemotherapy and radiation. This has led to new innovations and advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, which includes organ-preserving strategies for responsive disease, and minimally invasive approaces for the performance of total mesorectal excision/protectomyh for persistently advanced disease. This article discusses new strategies for rectal cancer therapy, including Watch and Wait, local excision, minimally invasive proctectomy, and transanal total mesorectal excision particularly in the setting of preoperative multimodality treatment.

Anorectal Function and Quality of Life in Patients With Early Stage Rectal Cancer Treated With Chemoradiation and Local Excision

BACKGROUND

Little is known about anorectal function and quality of life after chemoradiation followed by local excision, which is an alternative to total mesorectal excision for selected patients with early rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess anorectal function and health-related quality of life of patients with T2N0 rectal cancer who were treated with an alternative approach.

DESIGN

This was a prospective, phase II trial.

SETTINGS

The study was multicentric (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z6041).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients with stage cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinomas were treated with an oxaliplatin/capecitabine-based chemoradiation regimen followed by local excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Anorectal function and quality of life were assessed at enrollment and 1 year postoperatively with the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Questionnaire. Results were compared, and multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of outcome.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients (98%) were evaluated at enrollment and 66 (92%) at 1 year. Compared with baseline, no significant differences were found on Fecal Incontinence Severity Index scores at 1 year. Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life results were significantly worse in the lifestyle (p < 0.001), coping/behavior (p < 0.001), and embarrassment (p = 0.002) domains. There were no differences in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score, but the physical well-being subscale was significantly worse and emotional well-being was improved after surgery. Treatment with the original chemoradiation regimen predicted worse depression/self-perception and embarrassment scores in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life, and male sex was predictive of worse scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score and trial outcome index.

LIMITATIONS

Small sample size, relatively short follow-up, and absence of information before cancer diagnosis were study limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemoradiation followed by local excision had minimal impact on anorectal function 1 year after surgery. Overall quality of life remained stable, with mixed effects on different subscales. This information should be used to counsel patients about expected outcomes.

Neoadjuvant therapy and transanal endoscopic surgery in T2-T3 superficial, N0, M0 rectal tumors. Local recurrence, complete clinical and pathological response

INTRODUCTION

The association of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and transanal endoscopic surgery in T2 and superficial T3 rectal cancers presents promising results in selected patients. The main objective is to evaluate the long-term loco-regional and systemic recurrence and, as secondary objectives, to provide results of postoperative morbidity and the correlation between complete clinical and pathological response.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study including a consecutive series of patients with T2-T3 superficial rectal cancer, N0, M0 who refused radical surgery (2008-2016). The treatment consisted of preoperative chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) combined with radiotherapy (50, 4Gy) and transanal endoscopic surgery after 8weeks. Preoperative, surgical, pathological and long-term oncologic results were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were included in the study. Two of them required rescue radical surgery for unfavorable pathological results. A local recurrence (4.5%) was observed and 2patients presented systemic recurrence (9%), with a median follow-up of 45 months. A complete clinical tumor response was achieved in 12 patients (50%), and complete pathological tumor response in 9 patients (37.5%). Postoperative complications were observed in 5 patients (20.8%), and they were mild except one. There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this stage of rectal cancer, our results seem to support this strategy, mainly when a complete pathological response is achieved. The complete clinical tumor response does not coincide with the pathological tumor response. Randomized prospective studies should be performed to standardize this treatment.

Indications and Outcomes From 32 Consecutive Patients for the Treatment of Rectal Lesions by Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and short-term outcomes of the transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) technique.

METHODS

This is a descriptive review of prospectively collected data from 32 consecutive patients who underwent TAMIS procedures in our colorectal unit over a 40-month period. GelPOINT Path port was used in all cases. Demographic data, indications, tumor characteristics, morbidity, and follow-up data were collected. Primary endpoints included feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and resection quality.

RESULTS

Fifteen adenomas, 12 carcinomas, 1 gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and 1 neuroendocrine tumor were locally excised. Additionally, 3 pelvic abscesses were drained transanally using the TAMIS port. Mean distance from the anal verge was 5.6 ± 1.5 cm. Early postoperative complications occurred in 22%, with only one case of major complication (3.1%) requiring reoperation, and no postoperative mortality. Four carcinomas were understaged (33.3%) and 1 adenoma overstaged (6.7%) preoperatively. Three carcinomas were not suspected preoperatively (25%). Microscopic positive lateral margin was found in one case, and no affected deep margin was found. Fragmentation rate was 6.9%, 2 cases, both lesions over 20 cm². In cases of fit patients with high-risk carcinomas, 2 underwent immediate salvage surgery and another 2 refused and were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy. With a median follow-up of 26 months, the overall recurrence rate was 10.3%, 1 adenoma and 2 carcinomas.

CONCLUSION

TAMIS seems to be a safe and reproducible procedure for local excision of well-selected rectal lesions with low morbidity and good functional outcomes.

Local Excision Techniques for Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: What Are We Doing?

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence shows that the majority of rectal cancers demonstrate occult tumor scatter after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy that can extend for several centimeters under adjacent normal-appearing mucosa beside the residual mucosal abnormality or scar.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to determine all of the published selection criteria and technical descriptions for local excision to date with regard to this phenomenon.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched using the following key words: rectal cancer, local excision, radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies that assessed local excision of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Duplicate series were excluded from final analysis.

INTERVENTION

All of the data points were tabulated and analyzed using Microsoft Excel.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Criteria for patient selection, surgical technique, clinical restaging, pathologic assessment, and indications for completion surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

After exclusions, data from 25 studies that in total evaluated local excision in 1001 patients were included. Compared with the single accepted technique of total mesorectal excision, described techniques for local excision after neoadjuvant therapy demonstrate significant variability in many critical technical issues, such as marking/tattooing original tumor margins before neoadjuvant therapy, using pretreatment tumor size/stage as exclusion criteria, and specifically stating lateral excision margins. Where detailed, the majority of local recurrences occurred in patients with clear pathological margins, yet significant variation existed for pathological assessment and reporting, with few studies detailing R status and some not reporting margin status at all. Significant variability also existed for adverse tumor features that mandated completion surgery, and, importantly, many series describe patients refusing completion surgery where indicated.

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to perform meta-analysis because studies lacked sufficient methodologic homogeneity to synthesize.

CONCLUSIONS

The observations from this study prompt additional study, standardization of technique, and cautious use of local excision of rectal cancer in the setting of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

A Systematic Review of Local Excision After Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Are ypT0 Tumors the Limit?

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy reduces local recurrence after radical surgery for rectal cancer with complete pathological response in 15% to 25% of patients. Radical surgery is associated with significant morbidity that may be avoided by local excision in selected cases.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to determine the oncological outcomes and morbidity of local excision after neoadjuvant therapy.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

STUDY SELECTION

A systematic search of the databases using validated terms for rectal cancer, neoadjuvant therapy, and local excision was conducted.

INTERVENTIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy and local excision were the included interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pooled local recurrence, median survival, and pooled morbidity were measured.

RESULTS

Twenty unique studies were included (14 cohort, 5 comparative cohort, and 1 randomized controlled trial), describing 1068 patients. Patient choice, prohibitive comorbidity, good clinical response, and early stage disease were the most frequent indications for local excision. Pretreatment T2 and T3 tumors accounted for 46.4% and 30.7% of cases. Long-course treatment was administered in all of the studies, except to a cohort of 64 patients who received short-course radiotherapy. Pooled complete clinical response was 45.8% (95% CI, 31.4%-60.5%), and pooled complete pathological response was 44.2% (95% CI, 36.4%-52.0%). Median follow-up was 54 months (range, 12-81 months). ypT0 tumors had a pooled local recurrence rate of 4.0% (95% CI, 1.9%-6.9%) and a median disease-free survival rate of 95.0% (95% CI, 87.4%-100%). Pooled local recurrence and median disease-free survival rates for ypT1 tumors or higher were 21.9% (95% CI, 15.9%-28.5%) and 68.0% (58.3%-69.0%). Pooled incidence of complications was 23.2% (95% CI, 15.7%-31.7%), with suture-line dehiscence reported in 9.9% (95% CI, 4.8%-16.7%).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included study quality, high risk of selection bias and detection bias in study designs, and limited sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision after neoadjuvant therapy should only be considered a curative treatment if complete pathological response is obtained. Given the high rate of local recurrence among incomplete responders, future studies should focus on predicting patients who will achieve complete pathological response.

Multicentre study of short-course radiotherapy and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer

Background

Organ-preserving treatment for early-stage rectal cancer may avoid the substantial perioperative morbidity and functional sequelae associated with total mesorectal excision (TME). The initial results of an organ-preserving approach using preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) are presented.

Methods

Patients with cT1–2N0 rectal cancers staged using high-quality MRI and endorectal ultrasonography received SCRT, with TEMS 8–10 weeks later, at four regional referral centres between 2007 and 2013. Patients were generally considered high risk for TME surgery (a small number refused TME).

Results

Following SCRT and TEMS, 60 (97 per cent) of 62 patients had an R0 resection. Histopathological staging identified 20 ypT0 tumours, 23 ypT1, 18 ypT2 and one ypT3. Preoperative uT category was significantly associated with a complete pathological response, which was achieved in 13 of 27 patients with uT0/uT1 disease and in five of 29 with uT2 (P = 0·010). Acute complications affected 19 patients, the majority following TEMS. No fistulas occurred and no stomas were formed. Surveillance detected four intraluminal local recurrences at a median follow-up of 13 months, all in patients with tumours staged as ypT2. Salvage TME achieved R0 resection in three patients and a stent was placed in one patient owing to co-morbidities.

Conclusion

SCRT with TEMS was effective in the majority of patients considered high risk for (or who refused) TME surgery.

Management of colorectal T1 carcinoma treated by endoscopic resection from the Western perspective

Detection of early colorectal cancer is expected to rise in light of national colorectal cancer screening programs. This The present review article delineates current endoscopic risk assessments, differentiating invasive from non-invasive neoplasia, for high likelihood of lymph node metastasis in early colorectal cancer, also termed high-risk early colorectal cancer, and endoscopic and surgical resection methods from a Western hemisphere perspective.

[Organ preserving strategies for rectal cancer treatment]

For rectal cancers, the current standard of care consists of chemoradiation followed by radical surgery with total mesorectal excision. Oncologic results are good, especially regarding local recurrence rates, but at the cost of high morbidity rates and poor anorectal, urinary and sexual function results. Since chemoradiation yields 15 to 25% pathological complete response, the role of radical surgery is questioned for patients presenting with good response after chemoradiation and two organ preservation strategies have been offered: watch and wait strategy and local excision strategy. The aim of this review is to give the results of organ preservation after chemoradiotherapy series and to highlight different questions regarding initial patient's selection, complete clinical response definition, risk of mesorectal nodal involvement, follow-up modalities as well as oncologic and functional results.