Anal sphincter conservation for patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal rectum: long-term results of radiation therapy oncology group protocol 89-02

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

BACKGROUND

T1 rectal cancer (RC) patients are increasingly being treated by local resection alone but uniform surveillance strategies thereafter are lacking. To determine whether different local resection techniques influence the risk of recurrence and cancer-related mortality, a meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for T1RC patients treated with local surgical resection. The primary outcome was the risk of RC recurrence and RC-related mortality. Pooled estimates were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression. We also systematically searched and evaluated endoscopically treated T1RC patients in a similar manner.

RESULTS

In 2585 unique T1RC patients (86 studies) undergoing local surgical resection, the overall pooled cumulative incidence of recurrence was 9.1% (302 events, 95% CI 7.3-11.4%; I2 = 68.3%). In meta-regression, the recurrence risk was associated with histological risk status (p < 0.005; low-risk 6.6%, 95% CI 4.4-9.7% vs. high-risk 28.2%, 95% CI 19-39.7%) and local surgical resection technique (p < 0.005; TEM/TAMIS 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0% vs. other local surgical excisions 10.8%, 95% CI 6.7-16.8%). In 641 unique T1RC patients treated with flexible endoscopic excision (16 studies), the risk of recurrence (7.7%, 95% CI 5.2-11.2%), cancer-related mortality (2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.9), and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence (30.0%, 95% CI 14.7-49.4%) were comparable to outcomes after TEM/TAMIS (risk of recurrence 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0%, cancer-related mortality 2.8%, 95% CI 1.2-6.2% and among patients with recurrence 35.6%, 95% CI 21.9-51.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T1 rectal cancer may have a significantly lower recurrence risk after TEM/TAMIS compared to other local surgical resection techniques. After TEM/TAMIS and endoscopic resection the recurrence risk, cancer-related mortality and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence were comparable. Recurrence was mainly dependent on histological risk status.

Current State of Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer, with rectal cancer accounting for 30% of cases. The current standard of care curative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is (chemo)radiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Although neoadjuvant radiotherapy has reduced the risk of local recurrence to less than 10%, the risk of distant metastasis remained high at 30% affecting patient survival. In addition, there is a recognition that there is heterogeneity in tumor biology and treatment response with good responders potentially suitable for treatment de-escalation. Therefore, new treatment sequencing and regimens were investigated. Here, we reviewed the evidence for current neoadjuvant treatment options in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma, and highlight the new challenges in this new treatment landscape.

Factors associated with the refusal of surgery and the associated impact on survival in patients with rectal cancer using the National Cancer Database

Background

Surgical resection is an integral component of the curative-intent treatment for most patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer. However, some patients refuse surgery for a number of reasons. Utilizing the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we investigated the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with patients who were coded as having been offered but refused surgery, and the factors affecting overall survival (OS) in these patients.

Methods

Adult patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum (excluding T1N0M0 and M1 disease) diagnosed from 2004 to 2015 were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with refusal of surgery. OS of patients refusing surgery was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimate, log-rank test, propensity score matching, and proportional hazards regression.

Results

A total of 55,704 patients were identified: 54,266 received definitive surgery (97.4%) and 1,438 refused (2.6%). Of patients refusing surgery, 135 (9.4%) were stage I, 709 (49.3%) were stage II, and 594 (41.3%) were stage III. Patients were more likely to refuse surgery as the study period progressed (P<0.01). Factors associated with refusal of surgery on multivariate analysis include: age ≥70 years, Black race, non-private insurance, and tumor size greater than 2 cm (all values P≤0.01). The 5-year OS was 61.6% for the surgery cohort and 35.7% for the refusal cohort. In the propensity matched groups, median survival was 84.2 months in patients who received definitive surgery compared to 43.7 months in patients who refused surgery. As an index for comparison, patients who refused surgery but received both radiotherapy and chemotherapy had a median survival of 48.5 months. Among patients that refused surgery, those that received radiotherapy alone, chemotherapy alone, or radiotherapy and chemotherapy (compared to no treatment) experienced a survival benefit (all values P≤0.01).

Conclusions

In patients with non-metastatic adenocarcinoma of the rectum reported in the NCDB, age, race, and insurance status were associated with refusal of surgery. Refusal of surgery was more common in the later years of the study. Survival is poor in patients who refused surgical resection.

Tolerability and safety of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy with S-1 after limited surgery for T1 or T2 lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) after local excision for pT1 with high-risk features or pT2 rectal cancer is recommended as an optional treatment to achieve both curability and maintenance of quality of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term safety of combining limited surgery with adjuvant CRT for T1 or T2 lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, single-arm, prospective phase II trial. Patients diagnosed with lower rectal or anal canal cancer (clinical T1 or T2 with a maximum diameter of 30 mm and N0 and M0) underwent local excision or endoscopic resection. Patients received CRT with S-1 (tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil) after confirmation of well- or moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, and negative margins, and/or depth of submucosal invasion ≥ 1000 µm or muscularis propria, and/or positive lymphovascular invasion, and/or tumor budding grade of 2/3. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall and local relapse-free survival, safety, anal sphincter preservation rate, and anal function.

RESULTS

Pathological diagnosis was T1 in 36 patients and T2 in 16 patients. Serious complications after surgery were not reported. The CRT completion rate per protocol was 86.5% (45/52). Thirty-two patients developed 54 events of CRT-related adverse events, including only one patient with a grade 3 event (stomatitis). The most common CRT-related adverse event was diarrhea (n = 14). No patients showed deterioration of anal function at 3 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

CRT with S-1 after limited surgery for T1 or T2 lower rectal cancer resulted in a low incidence of toxicities and maintenance of anal function.

Widespread anorectal lymphovascular networks and tissue drainage: analyses from submucosal India ink injection and indocyanine green fluorescence imaging

AIM

Abdominoperineal resection is associated with poor prognosis in patients with advanced lower rectal cancer. This study aimed to analyse the functional lymphovascular network and tissue drainage in the anorectal region.

METHODS

In this descriptive study, we performed microanatomical evaluations and intra-operative imaging analysis in a cadaver and patients with rectal cancer. Specimens with India ink injection were collected from a cadaver and from six patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection. Intra-operative indocyanine green fluorescence imaging was performed on four patients who underwent surgery for lower rectal cancer. India ink was injected into the submucosa at the dentate line of specimens. Tissue sections were examined by immunohistochemistry for D2-40 and CD31. Intra-operative indocyanine green was injected into the submucosa at the dentate line. Lymph flow was traced using a near-infrared camera system.

RESULTS

Fascia branching from the rectal longitudinal muscle layer extended to the posterior hiatal ligament and lateral endopelvic fascia connective tissue lamina on the surface of the levator ani muscle. The fascia contained veins labelled with ink in their lumina and initial lymphatics. Intra-operative indocyanine green fluorescence imaging revealed extensive lymph flow from the muscle layer of the anal canal to the hiatal ligament and endopelvic fascia along the longitudinal muscle layer fibres.

CONCLUSIONS

The anorectal region contained widespread venous and lymphatic networks in proportion to its specific connective tissue framework around the longitudinal-muscle-layer-extending muscle bundles, which provides extensive networks for tissue fluid and cells.

Results of phase II trial of intensified neoadjuvant treatment with interdigitating radiotherapy and chemotherapy with oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (PROARCT trial)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The chemotherapy exposure during chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer is adequate for radiosensitization but suboptimal for treatment of distant micrometastasis. This study aimed to determine tolerability, dose intensity, response, and toxicity of a novel intensified neoadjuvant treatment approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were MRI-staged T3-4NxM0 rectal adenocarcinoma. Treatment consisted of FOLFOX chemotherapy given in weeks 1, 6, and 11 with pelvic radiotherapy (25.2 Gy in 3 weeks in 1.8 Gy/fraction with oxaliplatin and 5-FU continuous infusion) given in weeks 3-5, and weeks 8-10. Surgery was performed 4-6 weeks later. The primary endpoint was tolerability defined as the percentage of patients who were able to complete the planned treatment course. Survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Median age of the 40 patients was 61.5 years. Rectal MRI-stage was T3 in 88%. Overall, 95% completed the regimen. All patients received 50.4 Gy. Relative dose intensity (≥75%) was 92% and 98% for oxaliplatin and 5-FU, respectively. High grade toxicities included neutropenia (25% grade 3; 7.5% grade 4) and diarrhoea (10%). Pathologic CR rate was 20%. Median follow-up was 54 months. The 5-year overall survival, freedom from relapse, locoregional control, and freedom from distant metastasis of the cohort was 82%, 72%, 97% and 72%.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of intensified neoadjuvant treatment with interdigitating chemotherapy and radiotherapy is feasible with no increase in acute perioperative complications. A larger prospective study is required to further evaluate the potential survival benefit of this design.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment

BACKGROUND

The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions.

RESULTS

Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

How can we utilize local excision to help, not harm, geriatric patients with rectal cancer?

A majority of the morbidity and mortality burden of rectal cancer is distributed within the geriatric age group. Current surgical and medical treatment modalities pose significant challenges in treating complications specifically in the already pre-disposed senior population with baseline dysfunction. This chapter reviews the work-up, management, current data and oncologic outcomes of treating rectal cancer in the senior adult.

Local versus Radical Excision of Early Distal Rectal Cancers: A National Cancer Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) has been proposed as an alternative to radical resection for early distal rectal cancer, for which the optimal oncologic treatment remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare the overall survival of rectal cancer patients with early distal tumors who underwent LE versus abdominoperineal resection (APR) using a large contemporary database.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2004-2013) was used to identify patients with early T-stage rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent LE or APR. Patients were split into groups based on T stage and type of surgery (LE vs. APR). The primary outcome measure was overall survival. An adjusted Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the impact of treatment strategy on survival.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 2084 patients with T1 tumors and 912 patients with T2 tumors. For patients with T1 disease, after adjusting for age, sex, income level, race, Charlson score, insurance payor, and tumor size, there was no significant difference in survival between the LE and APR groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.22; P = 0.49). For patients with T2 disease, after adjusting for age, Charlson score, and tumor size, there was no significant difference in survival between patients undergoing LE + chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and APR (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84-1.45; P = 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early distal rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent LE had similar survival to patients who underwent APR. LE is an acceptable oncologic treatment strategy for patients with T1 rectal cancers, and LE with CRT is an acceptable oncologic treatment for patients with T2 distal rectal cancers.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

Radiation therapy for rectal cancer

Radiotherapy (RT) has remained an important pillar in the multi-modality management of rectal cancer. Adjuvant RT with concurrent chemotherapy (chemo-RT) was once the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer, but with time, that has now changed and neoadjuvant chemo-RT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery is the new standard. Alternatively, neoadjuvant RT alone remains an option and clinicians are tasked to choose between the two. In an era of personalised oncological management, it is unsurprising that the treatment for rectal cancer is following suit and upcoming trials are studying ways to improve outcomes and minimise toxicity for patients while tailoring treatments specific to each patient's tumour. We review the evolution of the role of RT in rectal cancer and look forward to what the future holds.

Long-Term Outcomes and Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients Receiving Radical Surgery for Pathological T1 Lower Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Few reports have evaluated the long-term outcomes of pathological T1 (pT1) lower rectal cancer (LRC), perhaps because pT1 LRC is classified as TNM stage I if lymph node metastasis (LNM) is absent and stage IIIA if LNM is present. Moreover, it is difficult to diagnose regional LNM preoperatively. This study aimed to clarify the long-term outcomes of radical surgery for pT1 LRC and risk factor(s) for LNM. Additionally, we examined whether preoperative computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were predictive of LNM in pT1 LRC.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of the clinical characteristics, short-term operative outcomes, and long-term survival rates of 155 patients who received radical surgery and were diagnosed with pT1 LRC at our hospital between January 1993 and February 2017.

RESULTS

Among patients with pT1 LRC, 5-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 94.0% and 95.8%, respectively. LNM status was not associated with statistically significant differences in recurrence-free or overall survival. Even in patients with LNM, the recurrence rate was only 9%. Among patients who lacked visible mesorectal lymph nodes on preoperative CT and MRI, LNM rates were 3.5% and 4.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The long-term outcomes after radical surgery for pT1 LRC are satisfactory or good, regardless of the presence or absence of LNM. In patients with pT1 LRC, the absence of visible mesorectal lymph nodes on preoperative CT and MRI is associated with a reduced likelihood of LNM and has a high negative predictive value for LNM.

Tumor location is an independent predictive factor for distant metastasis and metastatic sites of rectal adenocarcinoma in patients receiving total mesorectal excision

Background and Objectives: To evaluate the predictive factor for and patterns of distant metastasis in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma receiving total mesorectal excision (TME). Methods: We enrolled 217 consecutive patients who had histologically confirmed rectal adenocarcinoma and underwent surgery at Taipei Medical University- Wanfang Hospital between January 2000 and December 2014. TME was performed in all patients undergoing a sphincter-sparing procedure or abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer. We performed univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses of the distant metastasis rate in all patients to evaluate predictive factors. Overall survival (OS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. Results: A multivariate Cox regression analysis of the distant metastasis rate in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma identified tumor locations and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stages as prognostic risk factors. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of distant metastasis for the upper-third, middle-third, and AJCC stage I-II cancers were 0.08 (95% CI, 0.01-0.69; p = 0.021), 0.41 (95% CI, 0.15-0.99; p = 0.047), and 0.20 (95% CI, 0.10-0.66; p = 0.008), respectively. The 5-year lung metastasis rates among patients with upper-, middle-, and lower-third rectal cancers were 0%, 3.37%, and 13.33%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.001), and the 5-year liver metastasis rates among patients with upper-, middle-, and lower-third rectal cancers were 2.12%, 9.10%, and 11.76%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.096). The 5-year OS rates also differed with different rectal adenocarcinoma locations. The 5-year OS rates for upper, middle, and lower rectal cancers were 96%, 86%, and 64%, respectively (log-rank, p < 0.001). Conclusion: A poor OS rate and high lung or liver metastasis rate were observed in distal rectal adenocarcinoma. Longer intensive surveillance of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis after TME in distal rectal adenocarcinoma could be necessary.

The outcome of transanal endoscopic microsurgery in obese patients

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of obesity is as high as one-third of the adult population in the ultrasound. Obese patients operated for rectal cancer are less likely to undergo sphincter-preserving surgery, and have an increased morbidity and mortality. We aim to report the outcomes of transanal-endoscopic-microsurgery (TEM) in obese patients with benign and malignant neoplasms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analysis was carried out of all patients undergoing TEM at a single institution between 2004 and 2015. Clinical, demographic, and pathologic data were analyzed in respect to BMI; a dichotomous variable was created categorizing the patients in this retrospective case series as either obese (BMI≥30) or nonobese (BMI<30).

RESULTS

Of the 158 patients who underwent TEM during the study period, 51 (32%) were obese and 107 (68%) were nonobese. No significant differences were found in terms of patients' demographics and tumor characteristics. There were no significant differences in operative time [105 min (range: 75-170) and 98 (range: 56-170), respectively, P=0.2], hospital length of stay [3 days (range: 2-6) and 4 (range: 2-12), respectively, P=0.48], or complication rates (20 and 23%, respectively, P=0.68).

CONCLUSION

TEM is a safe procedure for rectal neoplasms in the obese population. We found no difference in surgical time and completeness of specimen resection, and no increase in complications or length of stay in the hospital in obese versus nonobese patients. As for selected high risk patients, the TEM may be of benefit in obese patients with T1/T2N0M0 rectal cancer.

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.

Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy After Local Resection for High-Risk T1 to T2 Low Rectal Cancer: Results of a Single-Arm, Multi-Institutional, Phase II Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

After treatment with local excision for TNM stage I low rectal cancer, the risk of local recurrence is not only high for T2 lesions but also for T1 lesions with features of massive invasion to the submucosal layer and/or lymphovascular invasion.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy combined with local excision in the treatment of T1 to T2 low rectal cancer.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective, single-arm, phase II trial.

SETTINGS

This was a multicenter study.

PATIENTS

From April 2003 to October 2010, 57 patients were treated with local excision after additional external beam irradiation (45 Gy) plus continuous 5-week intravenous injection of 5-fluorouracil (250 mg/m per day) at 10 domestic hospitals. Fifty-three patients had clinical T1N0 lesions, and 4 had T2N0 lesions in the low rectum, located below the peritoneal reflection.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary end point was disease-free survival at 5 years.

RESULTS

The completion rate for full-dose chemoradiotherapy was 86% (49/57). Serious, nontransient treatment-related complications were not reported. With a median follow-up of 7.3 years after local excision, the 5-year disease-free survival rate was 94% for the 53 patients with T1 lesions and 75% for the 4 patients with T2 lesions. There were 2 local recurrences during the entire observation period. Anal function after local excision and chemoradiation were kept at almost the same levels as observed before treatment.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by the small number of registered T2 rectal cancers, retrospective evaluations of quality of life, and the exclusion of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (a high-risk feature of T1 lesions).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of chemoradiotherapy to local excision of T1 rectal adenocarcinomas with poor prognostic features including deep submucosal invasion and lymphovascular invasion could improve on less favorable historic oncologic outcomes of local excision alone in this high-risk group for lymph node metastasis. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A421.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy instead of revision radical resection after local excision for high-risk early rectal cancer

Background

After local excision of early rectal cancer, revision radical resection is recommended for patients with high-risk pathologic stage T1 (pT1) or pT2 cancer, but the revision procedure has high morbidity rates. We evaluated the efficacy of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for reducing recurrence after local excision in these patients.

Methods

Eighty-three patients with high-risk pT1 or pT2 rectal cancer underwent postoperative adjuvant CCRT after local excision. We defined high-risk features as pT1 having tumor size ≤3 cm, and/or resection margin (RM) ≤3 mm, and/or lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and/or non-full thickness excision such as endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or unknown records regarding those features, or pT2 cancer. Radiotherapy was administered with a median dose of 50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy fraction size over 5–7 weeks. Concurrent 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin were administered for 4 days in the first and fifth weeks of radiotherapy.

Results

The median interval between local excision and radiotherapy was 34 (range, 11–104) days. Fifteen patients (18.1 %) had stage pT2 tumors, 22 (26.5 %) had RM of ≥3 mm, and 21 (25.3 %) had tumors of ≥3 cm in size. Thirteen patients (15.7 %) had LVI. Transanal excision was performed in 58 patients (69.9 %) and 25 patients (30.1 %) underwent EMR or ESD. The median follow-up was 61 months. The 5-year overall survival (OS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) rates for all patients were 94.9, 91.0, and 89.8 %, respectively. Multivariate analysis did not identify any significant factors for OS or LRFS, but the only significant factor affecting DFS was the pT stage (p = 0.027).

Conclusions

In patients with high-risk pT1 rectal cancer, adjuvant CCRT after local excision could be an effective alternative treatment instead of revision radical resection. However, patients with pT2 stage showed inferior DFS compared to pT1.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

Recurrence risk and prognostic parameters in stage I rectal cancers

BACKGROUND

The standard therapy for stage I rectum cancer is surgical resection. Currently, there is no strong evidence to suggest that any type of adjuvant therapy is beneficial. The risks of local relapse and distant metastasis are higher in rectal tumors. Therefore, while there is no clearly defined absolute indication for adjuvant therapy in lymph node negative colon cancers, rectum tumors that are T3N0 and higher require adjuvant treatment. Due to the more aggressive nature of rectal cancers, we explored the clinical and pathologic factors that could predict the risk of relapse in Stage I (T1-T2) disease and whether there was any progression-free survival benefit to adjuvant therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter study was carried out by the Anatolian Society of Medical Oncology. A total of 178 patients with rectal cancers who underwent curative surgery between January 1994 and August 2012 in 13 centers were included in the study. Patient demographics, including survival data and tumor characteristics were obtained from medical charts.

RESULTS

The median age was 58 years (range 26-85 years). Most tumors were well or moderately differentiated. For adjuvant treatment, 13 patients (7.3%) received radiotherapy alone, 12 patients (6.7%) received chemotherapy alone and 15 patients (8.4%) were given chemoradiotherapy. Median follow up was 29 months (3-225 months). Some 42 patients (23.6%) had relapse during follow up; 30 with local recurrence (71.4%) whereas 12 (28.6%) were distant metastases. Among the patients, 5-year DFS was 64% and OS was 82%. Mucinous histology and receiving adjuvant therapy were found to have statistically insignificant correlations with relapse and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In our retrospective analysis, approximately one quarter of patients exhibited either local or systemic relapse. The rates of relapse were slightly higher in the patients who had no adjuvant therapy. There may thus be a role for adjuvant therapy in high-risk stage I rectal tumors.

Predicting complete response: is there a role for non-operative management of rectal cancer?

Pre-operative chemoradiotherapy followed by a total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard of care for patients with locally advanced (stage II or III) rectal cancer. Approximately 20% of patients may achieve a pathologic complete response after chemoradiation therapy (CRT), which has been shown to be associated with better oncologic outcomes. Whether surgery can be avoided in this population is an area of active investigation. Recent studies demonstrated feasibility and safety of non-operative management in patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after chemoradiotherapy. In this article, we set out to review the current data on non-operative management and to identify areas requiring further investigation, including improvement in imaging for reassessment after CRT and identifying the optimal time frame for restaging. As the field moves forward with non-operative management in select patients with rectal cancer, there continues to be a need to better understand the prognostic factors and biomarkers that may more accurately characterize patients who are qualified for this "wait-and-see" approach and thereby avoid overtreatment, potentially leading to improvements in long-term quality of life.

A systematic review of local excision combined with chemoradiotherapy for early rectal cancer

AIM

Local excision of early rectal cancer is a less morbid alternative to major abdominal surgery. This review evaluates the role of local excision with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemoradiotherapy to identify a select group of patients where local excision is appropriate without significantly compromising the oncological outcome.

METHOD

MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify relevant articles investigating the role of local excision with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with T1/T2N0M0 disease. Eleven studies comprising 455 patients were selected. Oncological end-points included overall survival, disease-free and disease-specific survival, recurrence rates as well as perioperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

At a range of 30.5-115.2 months, median overall survival, disease-specific and disease-free survival were 75% (66-80.6%), 89% (75-93.3%) and 74% (64-85.2%), respectively. Median local, distant and overall recurrence rates were 10% (4.8-25%), 4.7% (4-11.8%) and 13.1% (10.7-23.5%), respectively. Mortality was 0% in all studies except one (2.9%). Most reported complications were minor and were treated conservatively.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides data suggesting that selected patients with T1/T2N0M0 rectal cancer may undergo local excision without compromising the oncological outcome otherwise conferred by total mesorectal excision. It may be a particularly useful option in patients in whom radical surgery is contraindicated. Randomized trials comparing both management strategies to consolidate this finding may lead to a paradigm change in the management of early rectal cancer.

Clinical outcomes of local excision following preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the treatment outcomes of local excision following preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who have not undergone radical surgery for any reason.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of 27 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by local excision were analyzed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the 5-year relapse-free survival rate, and the secondary endpoint was the pattern of recurrence.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 81.8 months (range, 28.6 to 138.5 months). The 5-year local relapse-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were 88.9%, 81.1%, 77.8%, and 85.0%, respectively. Six (22%) patients developed treatment failure; one (4%) patient had local recurrence only, three (11%) patients had distant recurrence only, and two (7%) patients had both. The 5-year LRFS, DMFS, RFS, and OS for patients with ypT0-1 compared with ypT2-3 were 94.1% vs. 77.8% (p=0.244), 94.1% vs. 55.6% (p=0.016), 88.2% vs. 55.6% (p=0.051), and 94.1% vs. 66.7% (p=0.073), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Local excision following preoperative chemoradiotherapy may be an alternative treatment for highly selected patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who have achieved ypT0-1 after preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

Early detection of colorectal cancer recurrence in patients undergoing surgery with curative intent: current status and challenges

Despite advances in neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, attention to proper surgical technique, and improved pathological staging for both the primary and metastatic lesions, almost half of all colorectal cancer patients will develop recurrent disease. More concerning, this includes ~25% of patients with theoretically curable node-negative, non-metastatic Stage I and II disease. Given the annual incidence of colorectal cancer, approximately 150,000 new patients are candidates each year for follow-up surveillance. When combined with the greater population already enrolled in a surveillance protocol, this translates to a tremendous number of patients at risk for recurrence. It is therefore imperative that strategies aim for detection of recurrence as early as possible to allow initiation of treatment that may still result in cure. Yet, controversy exists regarding the optimal surveillance strategy (high-intensity vs. traditional), ideal testing regimen, and overall effectiveness. While benefits may involve earlier detection of recurrence, psychological welfare improvement, and greater overall survival, this must be weighed against the potential disadvantages including more invasive tests, higher rates of reoperation, and increased costs. In this review, we will examine the current options available and challenges surrounding colorectal cancer surveillance and early detection of recurrence.

A population-based comparison of overall and disease-specific survival following local excision or abdominoperineal resection for stage I rectal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The use of local excision (LE) for early stage rectal adenocarcinoma is increasing due to the associated morbidity of radical resection. To determine if survival in stage I rectal cancer differs following LE or abdominoperineal resection (APR), we analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We selected patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2002 with T1-2N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma measuring ≤4 cm who underwent either local excision with (LE + RT) or without adjuvant radiation (LE alone) or APR alone. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was also performed to determine the effect of covariates on OS and DSS.

RESULTS

A total of 2,391 patients were identified including 981 (41 %) treated with APR, 1,018 (43 %) treated with LE alone, and 392 (16 %) treated with LE + RT. With a median follow-up of 69 months, there was no difference in OS or DSS seen between the three groups (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). When stratifying by T-stage, there was a significant difference in overall survival between LE alone and APR for T2 disease. However, there was no difference in DSS between these two subgroups. There were no other significant survival differences between all comparable subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population-based study, there was no difference in long-term DSS between patients who underwent an APR compared to selected patients who underwent LE with or without adjuvant radiation. Although these data further reinforce the promising data regarding the selected use of LE, further prospective studies are needed to further elucidate the role of LE in this setting.

Local excision of rectal cancer followed by radical surgery because of poor prognostic features does not compromise the long term oncologic outcome

AIM

The outcome of patients undergoing full-thickness local excision (LE) of rectal cancers may be compromised if poor prognostic features are found in the LE specimen. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term results of radical surgery performed after LE because poor prognostic factors are identified.

METHOD

Patients with biopsy-proven rectal cancer who had undergone full-thickness LE followed by radical surgery because of a positive margin, T stage ≥3, lymphovascular invasion, poor differentiation or mucinous histology were identified from a prospective database. Their records were retrospectively reviewed and follow up was updated.

RESULTS

Between 1995 and 2003, 17 patients underwent LE followed by radical surgery because of poor prognostic features. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy was given to 11 (65%) patients before radical surgery. Patients underwent radical surgery after a median of 14 (range: 0-40) weeks from LE. Nine underwent a low anterior resection and eight an abdominoperineal resection. At the time of radical surgery, residual disease was found in six (35%) patients (in lymph nodes in three; intramural in two; and both lymph nodes and intramural in one). Four of the patients with residual disease had undergone neoadjuvant therapy before radical surgery. The mean follow up was 110 (95% CI: 92-129) months. Recurrence-free survival at 10 years was 88%. There was no case of local recurrence, and two patients died of metastatic disease.

CONCLUSION

In this series patients who underwent early radical surgery because of poor prognostic features found at LE had good overall and cancer-specific long-term survival. Even after neoadjuvant therapy, more than a third of patients had residual disease at the time of radical surgery. We therefore recommend radical surgery with neoadjuvant therapy when poor prognostic features are found at LE.

Follow up after endoscopic resection in submucosal invasive colorectal cancers

Submucosal invasive colorectal cancers (SM-CRC) have approximately a 10% chance of lymph node metastasis, which requires surgical resection including lymph node dissection for curative treatment. It is important to optimally survey patients after curative resection for SM-CRC in order to detect early recurrence. In the present report, we principally show the long-term outcomes after follow up of SM-CRC resected endoscopically based on a report of the literature and our experience in Japan. The long-term outcomes of low-risk SM-CRC endoscopically resected alone or high-risk SM-CRC with additional surgical resection with lymph node dissection are excellent. However, the risk of local recurrence of endoscopic resection alone in patients with high-risk submucosal invasive cancer was significantly higher in rectal cancer as compared to similar colonic cancer. Patients with submucosal rectal cancer showing high-risk pathological features are, therefore, strongly recommended to undergo additional treatment. We consider that longer follow up is required for patients with SM-CRC because recurrence occurred relatively later in SM-CRC compared to advanced colorectal cancer.

Integrated peripheral boost in preoperative radiotherapy for the locally most advanced non-resectable rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Few studies have explored the potential clinical advantages of dose escalation and integrated boosts for patients with non-resectable locally advanced rectal cancer. The possibility of escalating dose to non-resectable regions in these patients was the aim of this study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven patients with locally very advanced rectal tumours (sacrum overgrowth or growth into pelvic side walls) were evaluated. Intensity modulated photon and pencil beam scanning proton plans with simultaneously integrated boosts (45 Gy to elective lymph nodes, 50 Gy to tumour and 62.5 Gy to boost area in 25 fractions) were compared.

RESULTS

Target coverage was achieved with both photon and proton plans. Estimated risks of acute side effects put the two patients with the largest tumours at unacceptable risk for intestinal toxicity, regardless of modality. The remaining five patients had beneficial sparing of dose to the small intestine with protons.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding boost to areas where rectal tumours infiltrate adjacent non-resectable organs is an attractive option which appears possible using both photon and proton irradiation. Proton plans reduced dose to organs at risk. Integrated peripheral boosts should be considered more frequently in these very advanced tumours.

Organ-preserving therapy for rectal cancer

SUMMARY Total mesorectal excision has resulted in low local recurrence rates in rectal cancer patients; however, it is associated with a significant impairment in quality of life. The operation may be disfiguring and cause permanent effects on gastrointestinal, genitourinary and sexual function. Recently, researchers have identified subgroups of rectal cancer patients who may be able to forgo total mesorectal excision without compromising their oncological outcomes. Two groups of patients are candidates for organ preservation: those with early-stage disease that may be adequately addressed by a more limited resection, and those with locally advanced disease that has responded completely to neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, radiation alone may be curative in both early and locally advanced disease. This article reviews the data regarding these approaches.

Unusual recurrent rectal carcinoma: a cancer field theory viewpoint

AIM

The rate of rectal cancer locoregional recurrence following radical surgery varies from 4% to 33%. Though the causes are unclear, likely factors include microscopic tumor residues in the lymphatics, positive resection margins and exfoliation of tumor cells and their subsequent intraluminar spread during operation. Other significant factors include type and technique of surgical procedure. Recently, it has been demonstrated that local recurrence may also be associated with the biological behaviour of the tumor and/or with the composition of the cellular microenvironment which creates optimal conditions for the growth and spread of tumor cells.

CASE REPORT

The presented case here is interesting because the tumour recurred early following a curative surgical procedure with negative resection margins, without positive lymph nodes, without infiltration of the pelvic wall and without distant metastases.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a determined risk of genetically altered tumor field encompassing epithelial or stromal changes, a different treatment strategy, including gene therapy, anti-inflammatory or anti-angiogenic therapy should be chosen to minimize increased tumor risk.

Update and debate issues in surgical treatment of middle and low rectal cancer

Based on a review of the literature, this paper provides an update on surgical treatment of middle and low rectal cancer and discusses issues of debate surrounding that treatment. The main goal of the surgical treatment of rectal cancer is radical resection of the tumor and surrounding lymphatic tissue. Local excision of early rectal cancer can be another treatment option, in which the patient can avoid possible complications related to radical surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has been recommended for patients with cT3-4N0 or any T N+ rectal cancer because CRT shows better local control and less toxicity than adjuvant CRT. However, recent clinical trials showed promising results for local excision after neoadjuvant CRT in selected patients with low rectal cancer. In addition, the "wait and see" concept is another modality that has been reported for the management of tumors that show complete clinical remission after neoadjuvant CRT. Although radical surgery for middle and low rectal cancer is the cornerstone therapy, an ultralow anterior resection with or without intersphincteric resection (ISR) has become an alternative standard surgical method for selected patients. Many studies have reported on the oncological safety of the ISR, but few of them have addressed the issue the functional outcome. Furthermore, an abdominoperineal resection (APR) has problems with high rates of tumor perforations and positive circumferential resection margins, and those factors have contributed to its having a high rate of local recurrence and a poor survival rate for rectal cancer compared with sphincter-saving procedures. Recently, great efforts have been made to reduce these problems, and the total levator excision or the extended APR concept has emerged. Surgical management for low rectal cancer should aim to radically excise the tumor and to preserve as much of the sphincter function as possible by using multidisciplinary approaches. However, further prospective clinical trials are needed for tailored treatment of rectal cancer patients.

Oncological outcomes of transanal local excision for high risk T1 rectal cancers

AIM: To evaluate the oncological outcomes of transanal local excision and the need for immediate conventional reoperation in the treatment of patients with high risk T₁ rectal cancers.

METHODS: Twenty five high risk T₁ rectal cancers treated by transanal local excision at the Guangdong General Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. Twelve patients received transanal local excision and 13 patients underwent subsequent immediate surgical rescue after transanal local excision within 4 wk. Differences in the local recurrence rates and 5-year overall survival rates between the two groups were analyzed. The prognostic value of immediate conventional reoperation for high risk T₁ rectal cancers was also evaluated.

RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 62 mo. The local recurrence rates after transanal local excision for high risk T₁ rectal cancer were 50%. By immediate conventional reoperation, the local recurrence rates were significantly reduced to 7.7%. The difference between these two groups was statistically significant (P = 0.030). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a trend for decreased 5-year overall survival rates for patients treated by transanal local excision compared with immediate conventional reoperation (63% vs 89%).

CONCLUSION: Transanal local excision cannot be considered sufficient treatment for patients with high risk T₁ rectal cancers. Immediate conventional reoperation should be performed if the pathology of the local excision is high risk.

Management of local rectal cancer: evidence, controversies and future perspectives in radiotherapy

SUMMARY Rectal cancer comprises approximately 25% of all primary colorectal cancers. The optimal diagnostic and treatment approach for this heterogeneous malignancy is still contentious, and improvements in general multidisciplinary management are required. During recent years a number of randomized studies led by European investigators have shown optimization in preoperative staging, improvements in surgical technique and the histopathological assessment of the resected specimen, and the benefit of combined modality treatment. The main recommendations and the trends in research on radiotherapy and integrated treatments will be summarized with an overview on some relevant points about imaging and pathological staging.

Local excision: is it an adequate substitute for radical resection in T1/T2 patients?

Local excision (LE) was historically developed to palliate patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who either are medically unfit or have adamantly refused to undergo transabdominal standard resection (SR) procedures. Over the years, the tradeoffs between the oncologic benefit and adverse functional sequelae associated with SR procedures have been increasingly recognized. In parallel, there has been growing interest in considering LE as an alternative to SR in select patients with early-stage disease. However, concerns regarding its oncologic adequacy remain. These concerns relate to the adequacy of tumor resection, the removal of mesorectal disease, the accuracy of preoperative selection, and the use of adjunctive treatment modalities. Evolving strategies that aim at improving the oncologic outcomes of LE for stage I T1/T2 rectal cancers include adoption of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and the addition of non-surgical modalities. Current evidence surrounding these approaches is examined to provide a basis for an informed discussion with patients. Key factors to be considered in formulating the treatment plan for an individual patient with T1/T2 rectal cancer are summarized.

Chemotherapy in rectal cancer: variation in utilization and development of an evidence-based benchmark rate of optimal chemotherapy utilization

BACKGROUND

Published chemotherapy utilization rates for rectal cancer show considerable variation. Optimal chemotherapy utilization rates can serve as benchmarks to assess the quality of cancer care. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal proportion of patients with rectal cancer who should receive chemotherapy at least once.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An optimal chemotherapy utilization tree was constructed using indications for chemotherapy identified from evidence-based treatment guidelines. Epidemiologic data were merged with treatment indications to calculate an optimal chemotherapy utilization rate; this rate was compared with reported actual rates of chemotherapy utilization.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy is indicated at least once in 64% of patients with rectal cancer. Although the actual (Australian and United States data) and optimal utilization rates are comparable for patients presenting in stages II or III rectal cancer, actual utilization rates are higher than the optimal for stage I and lower than optimal for patients presenting in stage IV rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy may be under-utilized in the initial management of patients presenting with metastatic rectal cancer.

Depth of tumor invasion independently predicts lymph node metastasis in T2 rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors of lymph node metastasis (LNM) for T2 rectal cancer.

METHODS

From a prospectively maintained single-institution database, we identified 346 consecutive pT2 rectal cancers treated with total mesorectal excision from 1998 to 2009. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors associated with overall and intermediate/apical LNM. The incidence of overall and intermediate/apical LNM was analyzed by tree analysis.

RESULTS

Age, tumor location, pathological features, and depth of invasion were independent predictors for overall LNM. Tumor location, pathological features, and depth of invasion were independent predictors for intermediate/apical LNM. Tree analysis showed that the incidence of LNM was 7.7% for upper rectal cancer with favorable pathological features, and 3.4% for mid/lower rectal cancer without other identified risk factors. The incidence of intermediate/apical LNM was 5.7% for superficial T2 rectal cancer with favorable pathological features, and 3.1% for deep T2 rectal cancer locating in upper rectum with favorable pathological features.

CONCLUSIONS

Depth of invasion is an independent predictor for LNM in T2 rectal cancer. Using tree analysis, we identified a subset of patients with low risk of LNM who may be candidates of local excision.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria: local excision in early-stage rectal cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection is considered standard treatment for early rectal cancer. These procedures, however, carry a risk of morbidity and mortality that may not be warranted for early distal lesions, which may be treated with local excision. Emerging data has investigated the efficacy of local excision in patients with early stage rectal cancers. An expert panel designated by the American College of Radiology has reviewed supporting data, from a few prospective multi-institutional trials and a number of single-institution, retrospective reviews. The consensus recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a local excision approach. Optimal candidates for local excision alone include small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. A number of procedures may be safely used including transanal, posterior trans-sphincteric, posterior proctotomy, transanal excision, or transanal microsurgery. It is important to note that none of these include lymph node evaluation, and depending on the risk of lymph node metastases, adjuvant radiation with or without chemotherapy may be warranted. Patients with positive margins or T3 lesions are at high risk of local recurrence and should be offered immediate APR or LAR. However, patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors, or those who are not amenable to more radical surgery may benefit from adjuvant treatment. Data have also reported excellent local control rates for neoadjuvant radiation +/- chemotherapy followed by local excision in higher risk patients, but it is not yet clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

Is total mesorectal excision always necessary for T1-T2 lower rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND

The goal of this multicenter study was to clarify the determinants of local excision for patients with T1-T2 lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Data from 567 consecutive patients who underwent radical resection for T1-T2 lower rectal cancer at 12 institutions between 1991 and 1998 were reviewed. Rates of lymph node metastasis were investigated using a tree analysis, which was hierarchized using independent risk factors for nodal involvement.

RESULTS

The independent risk factors for lymph node metastasis were female gender, depth of tumor invasion, histology other than well-differentiated adenocarcinoma, and lymphatic invasion. According to the first three parameters that can be obtained preoperatively, only 0.99% of the patients without risk factors had lymph node metastasis. On the other hand, even if the lower rectal cancer was at stage T1, women with histological types other than well-differentiated adenocarcinoma had an approximately 30% probability of having lymph node metastasis. Lymphatic invasion was most useful to predict nodal involvement among patients with T2 lower rectal cancer. The rates of lymph node metastasis in T2 patients with and without lymphatic invasion were 32.9% and 9.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender is one of the most important predictors for lymph node metastasis in patients with early distal rectal cancer. Three parameters, including depth of tumor invasion, histology, and gender, are useful determinants for local excision. Additional studies are required to establish the minimum optimal treatment for T2 lower rectal cancer.

Recurrences after local excision for early rectal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The role of local excision in treating rectal cancer patients continues to be controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term oncological results of local excision for early rectal adenocarcinomas and review the outcomes of salvage therapy on rectal cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 1992 and September 2005, 35 consecutive patients with early-stage primary rectal adenocarcinomas were treated by local excision with curative intent. The mean tumor distance from the anal verge was 5 cm (range, 1-10 cm).

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 66 months (range, 17-161 months). Pathological examination revealed 23 cases of T1 and 12 cases of T2. Recurrence had developed in 10 patients (6 local recurrences, 4 systemic recurrences). Purely extrapelvic recurrence was observed in only two (5.7%) patients. Of the eight recurrent patients with surgical salvage, five survived with no evidence of disease at the time of this analysis. The 5-year local recurrence-free and disease-free survival rates were 79.6% and 67.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Local excision alone of early-staged rectal adenocarcinomas, even in the ideal candidate, is followed by a relatively higher local recurrence rate than previously reported and may not be a valid modality. Either the use of adjuvant therapy with local excision, even in patients with T1 lesions or the use of preoperative therapy followed by local excision has good promise.

Rectal cancer

Surgery is the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment. Oncological cure and overall survival continue to be the main goals, but sparing of the anal sphincter mechanism and functional results are also important. The modern management of rectal cancer is a multidisciplinary approach, and pre-operative staging is of crucial importance when planning treatment in these patients. Pre-operative staging is used to determine the indication for neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection or to determine whether local excision is an option in carefully selected patients with early rectal cancer. Surgery in the form of total mesorectal excision (TME) has become the standard of care for mid and distal rectal cancers. Early rectal cancers do not require neoadjuvant therapy. For locally advanced cancers of the lower two-thirds of the rectum, the combination of surgical resection with chemoradiotherapy decreases local recurrence rates and probably improves overall survival. Whereas in the past local excision was only contemplated in patients who were unfit for radical surgery or for local palliation in cases of metastatic disease, over the last number of years there has been increasing interest in local treatment with curative intent in early rectal cancer.

Multidisciplinary treatment of resectable rectal cancer

This review identifies evidence that influences current practices in the multidisciplinary treatment and shapes future directions in the treatment of resectable rectal cancer. Recent advances in surgery, radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy have provided measurable improvements in disease control, functional outcomes and quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. However, controversies remain regarding the optimum delivery of adjuvant therapies. Preoperative radiation either with or without concurrent chemotherapy demonstrates lower recurrence, with minimal survival benefit. Currently, the use of neoadjuvant standard fractionation chemoradiation versus short-course radiation without chemotherapy is controversial and under investigation. New combinations of chemotherapeutic agents and targeted therapies are also being evaluated. In addition, criteria for patient selection are being re-evaluated to determine the relative benefit of modern treatments, so that we may better tailor adjuvant therapy recommendations to be patient-specific. Recommendations for adjuvant treatments of rectal cancer are continuing to evolve; however, survival has been only marginally affected despite low incidence of local recurrence. Future trials should aim to address the role of adjuvant therapies utilizing new criteria, such as function, quality of life and impact on development of metastatic disease.

Preoperative staging and treatment options in T1 rectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Major rectal resection for T1 rectal cancer offers more than 95% cancer specific five-year survival to patients surviving the first 30 days after surgery. A significant further improvement by development of the surgical technique may not be possible. Improvements in the total survival rate have to come from a more differentiated treatment modality, taking patient and procedure related risk factors into account. Subgroups of patients have operative mortality risks of 10% or more. Operative complications and long-term side effects after rectum resection are frequent and often severe.

RESULTS

Local treatment of T1 cancers combined with close follow-up, early salvage surgery or later radical resection of local recurrences or with chemo-radiation may lead to fewer severe complications and comparable, or even better, long-term survival. Accurate preoperative staging and careful selection of patients for local or non-operative treatment are mandatory. As preoperative staging, at present, is not sufficiently accurate, strategies for completion, salvage or rescue surgery is important, and must be accepted by the patient before local treatment for cure is initiated.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that polyps with low-risk T1 cancers should be treated with endoscopic snare resection in case of Haggitt's stage 1 or 2. TEM is recommended if resection margins are uncertain after snare resection for Haggitt's stage 3 and 4, and for sessile and flat, low-risk T1 cancers. Average risk patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be offered rectum resection, but old and comorbid patients with high-risk T1 cancers should be treated individually according to objective criteria as age, physical performance as well as patient's preference. All patients treated for cure with local resection or non-surgical methods should be followed closely.

Local excision for rectal carcinoma

Local excision is an alternative approach to radical proctectomy for rectal cancer, but from an oncologic standpoint, it is a compromise, and its role remains controversial. Careful patient selection is essential because local excision is generally considered only for early rectal cancer with no evidence of nodal metastasis, parameters that can be predicted by clinical examination, and various radiologic modalities with variable accuracy. In this review, we present the literature evaluating the oncologic adequacy of local excision, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery and the results of salvage surgery after local excision. An overview of local excision in the context of perioperative adjuvant therapies is included. Finally, we suggest a treatment algorithm for local excision in rectal cancer.

[Site of local surgery in adenocarcinoma of the rectum T2N0M0]

INTRODUCTION

The local exeresis adenocarcinoma of the rectum T(2)N(0)M(0) (ADC-T2), using transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), has the benefit of achieving lower morbidity with a better quality of life. However, local occurrence of the local exeresis is greater than 20%, which is unacceptable these days.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective, observational follow up study. The tumours committee agreed that those ADC-T2 patients could have the following treatments: total mesorectal excision (TME), simple TEM, TEM with postoperative chemo- and radiotherapy (Ct-Rt), preoperative Ct-Rt with subsequent TEM and radical surgical rescue (TME) within at least 4 weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 146 patients operated on using TEM, 75 had adenocarcinomas, 59 adenomas, 6 scarring wounds, 5 carcinoids and 1 GIST. Of the adenocarcinomas 22 were ADC-T2. Follow up: median of 16 months (range, 3-32 months). The overall local recurrence was 18% (4/22). According to the treatment strategy the local occurrence was: TEM as the only procedure, 20% (2/10). Radical surgical rescue was performed on 3 patients after TEM, with no local or systemic recurrences. TEM with Qt-Rt after surgery was performed on 6 patients, with a local recurrence of 33% (2/6). Ct-Rt and subsequent TEM in 3 patients, with no local or systemic recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of ADC-T2 using simple TEM is not effective. The combination of Ct-Rt after TEM, does not improve the results of TME. It is possible to rescue those patients without changing the overall survival. Preoperative Ct-Rt and TEM appears to be the approach that obtains a clinical and histological response, although a response is needed by clinical trials.