1
|
Anker CJ, Tchelebi LT, Selfridge JE, Jabbour SK, Akselrod D, Cataldo P, Abood G, Berlin J, Hallemeier CL, Jethwa KR, Kim E, Kennedy T, Lee P, Sharma N, Small W, Williams VM, Russo S. Executive Summary of the American Radium Society on Appropriate Use Criteria for Nonoperative Management of Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 120:946-977. [PMID: 38797496 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.05.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2024] [Revised: 04/15/2024] [Accepted: 05/17/2024] [Indexed: 05/29/2024]
Abstract
For patients with rectal cancer, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery (trimodality therapy) is associated with significant long-term toxicity and/or colostomy for most patients. Patient options focused on quality of life (QOL) have dramatically improved, but there remains limited guidance regarding comparative effectiveness. This systematic review and associated guidelines evaluate how various treatment strategies compare to each other in terms of oncologic outcomes and QOL. Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology were used to search for prospective and retrospective trials and meta-analyses of adequate quality within the Ovid Medline database between January 1, 2012, and June 15, 2023. These studies informed the expert panel, which rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 6 clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). The search process yielded 197 articles that advised voting. Increasing data have shown that nonoperative management (NOM) and primary surgery result in QOL benefits noted over trimodality therapy without detriment to oncologic outcomes. For patients with rectal cancer for whom total mesorectal excision would result in permanent colostomy or inadequate bowel continence, NOM was strongly recommended as usually appropriate. Restaging with tumor response assessment approximately 8 to 12 weeks after completion of radiation therapy/chemoradiation therapy was deemed a necessary component of NOM. The panel recommended active surveillance in the setting of a near-complete or complete response. In the setting of NOM, 54 to 56 Gy in 27 to 31 fractions concurrent with chemotherapy and followed by consolidation chemotherapy was recommended. The panel strongly recommends primary surgery as usually appropriate for a T3N0 high rectal tumor for which low anterior resection and adequate bowel function is possible, with adjuvant chemotherapy considered if N+. Recent data support NOM and primary surgery as important options that should be offered to eligible patients. Considering the complexity of multidisciplinary management, patients should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting, and therapy should be tailored to individual patient goals/values.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J Anker
- Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Vermont Cancer Center, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Leila T Tchelebi
- Northwell, New Hyde Park, New York; Department of Radiation Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, New York.
| | - J Eva Selfridge
- Division of Solid Tumor Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Dmitriy Akselrod
- Department of Radiology, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Peter Cataldo
- Department of Surgery, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington, Vermont
| | - Gerard Abood
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood, Illinois
| | - Jordan Berlin
- Division of Hematology Oncology, Department of Medicine Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | | | - Krishan R Jethwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Ed Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Timothy Kennedy
- Department of Surgery, Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Percy Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Navesh Sharma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, WellSpan Cancer Center, York, Pennsylvania
| | - William Small
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, Illinois
| | - Vonetta M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering, New York, New York
| | - Suzanne Russo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, MetroHealth, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Li A, Mao M, Chen R, Chi P, Huang Y, Wu J, Xu B. Excluding external iliac node irradiation during neoadjuvant radiotherapy decreases lower intestinal toxicity without compromising efficacy in T4b rectal cancer patients with tumours involving the anterior structures. Discov Oncol 2024; 15:76. [PMID: 38492016 PMCID: PMC10944434 DOI: 10.1007/s12672-024-00885-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To explore the impact of excluding the external iliac node (EIN) from the clinical target volume (CTV) during preoperative radiotherapy in T4b rectal cancer with anterior structure invasion. METHODS We retrospectively identified 132 patients with T4b rectal cancer involving the anterior structures who received radiotherapy followed by surgery between May 2010 and June 2019. Twenty-nine patients received EIN irradiation (EIN group), and 103 did not (NEIN group). Failure patterns, survival and toxicities were compared between the two groups. RESULTS The most common failure was distant metastasis (23.5%). 11 (8.3%) patients developed locoregional recurrence, 10 (9.7%) patients were in the NEIN group, and 1 (3.4%) was in the EIN group (P = 0.34). The EIN region failure was rare (1/132, 0.8%). The locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 96.3% vs. 90.5%, 82.1% vs.73.7%, 75.9% vs. 78.0% and 72.4% vs. 68.3% (all P > 0.05) for the EIN group and NEIN group, respectively. The incidence of grade 3-4 acute toxicity in the lower intestine was significantly higher in the EIN group than in the NEIN group (13.8% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.02). The Dmax, V35 and V45 of the small bowel was decreased in the NEIN group compared to the EIN group. CONCLUSIONS Exclusion of the EIN from the CTV in T4b rectal cancer with anterior structure invasion could reduce lower intestinal toxicity without compromising oncological outcomes. These results need further evaluation in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anchuan Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Xinquan Road 29, Fuzhou, 350001, China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Clinical Medicine, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, China
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Intelligent Imaging and Precision Radiotherapy for Tumors, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, China
- Clinical Research Center for Radiology and Radiotherapy of Fujian Province (Digestive, Hematological and Breast Malignancies), Fuzhou, 350001, China
| | - Miaobin Mao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Xinquan Road 29, Fuzhou, 350001, China
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Intelligent Imaging and Precision Radiotherapy for Tumors, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, China
- Clinical Research Center for Radiology and Radiotherapy of Fujian Province (Digestive, Hematological and Breast Malignancies), Fuzhou, 350001, China
| | - Runfan Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Xinquan Road 29, Fuzhou, 350001, China
| | - Pan Chi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001, China
| | - Ying Huang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001, China
| | - Junxin Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuma Road 420, Fuzhou, 350014, China.
| | - Benhua Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Xinquan Road 29, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
- Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Clinical Medicine, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Intelligent Imaging and Precision Radiotherapy for Tumors, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
- Clinical Research Center for Radiology and Radiotherapy of Fujian Province (Digestive, Hematological and Breast Malignancies), Fuzhou, 350001, China.
| |
Collapse
|