Patients with rectal cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy have an increased survival: a population-based longitudinal study

A large population-based and validated study on the follow-up management and supportive strategy of locally advanced rectal cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the predictive factors and metastatic time for liver and lung metastasis in locally advanced rectal cancer (RC) patients.

METHODS

Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify risk factors and prognostic factors for liver metastasis and lung metastasis in RC. Survival probabilities were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier model and compared using the log-rank test between groups. The probability of time-to-event occurrence was calculated using the random survival forest model. Finally, the SEER database was used to verify our findings.

RESULTS

Our results indicated that pathological T stage and pathological N stage were independent predictive factors for liver metastasis. Furthermore, CEA level, pathological T stage, and tumor deposit were independent predictive factors for lung metastasis. Based on the results of a multivariate Cox analysis, we categorized patients with liver and lung metastasis into three groups based on their scores. The results revealed that patients with higher scores had a higher probability of experiencing metastasis. For liver metastasis, Groups 1, 2, and 3 all exhibited higher occurrence rates within the first 24 months. However, for lung metastasis, Group 4 showed the highest occurrence rate at the 12th month, while Groups 5 and 6 exhibited the highest occurrence rates at the 15th month.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, we developed predictive models to determine the likelihood of liver and lung metastasis in RC patients. It is crucial to implement a more intensive surveillance program for patients with unfavorable risk profiles in order to facilitate early detection of metastasis.

Neoadjuvant management of locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - Heading towards a promising change in treatment paradigm

Traditional chemotherapy-based adjuvant therapies for locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have been associated with poor clinical outcomes driven partly by its complex anatomy and molecular heterogeneity. Treatment for PDAC is challenged by presence of a dense tumour microenvironment involving an interplay of multiple tumoural and stromal components which promote metastatic oncogenic behaviour. PDAC also involves aberrations in multiple signalling pathways with paucity of treatment options against the most common mutations including KRAS, TP53, CDKN2A andSMAD4. However, recent discovery of new mechanisms implicated in pancreatic carcinogenesis have led to identification of promising mechanistic therapeutic targets such as NET1 and ULK1. Early evidence also suggests the utility of targeting multiple DNA repair processes, modulators of DNA replication and major DNA damage response regulators. We explore the clinical rationale behind a neoadjuvant therapeutic strategy and emerging predictors of survival benefit associated with this approach. We also discuss challenges and opportunities originating from recent clinical trials evaluating neoadjuvant treatments composed of various combinations of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapeutic regimens that have aimed to address some of these biological challenges. Selective treatment of patients harbouring specific genomic aberrations with targeted agents and immunotherapy can translate into optimum survival outcomes in PDAC. We also share perspectives on emerging prospective clinical evidence regarding stromal modifying agents, such as Tumour Growth Factor-Beta and Connective Tissue Growth Factor inhibitors along with novel vaccination-based approaches in improving PDAC outcomes.

Clinical Outcomes of Ileostomy Closure during versus after Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer

Background

Protective ileostomy can effectively prevent severe anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery; however, the optimal timing for ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the safety and long-term outcomes of early ileostomy closure during adjuvant chemotherapy.

Method

Patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery combined with protective ileostomy and adjuvant chemotherapy between April 2017 and April 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into an early closure group during chemotherapy (group A) and a late closure group after chemotherapy (group B).

Results

A total of 215 patients were included in this study, with 115 in group A and 100 in group B. There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups. In group A, durations of stoma status (p < 0.001) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) (p < 0.001) were shorter, and rectal stenosis (p=0.036) and stoma-related complications (p=0.007), especially stoma stenosis (p=0.041), were less common. However, compliance with chemotherapy was worse (p=0.009). There were no significant differences in operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, incidence and severity of LARS, disease-free survival, or overall survival between groups.

Conclusion

Early ileostomy closure can effectively reduce the duration of stoma status, duration of LARS, rectal stenosis, and stoma-related complications while not affecting surgical complications and oncological outcomes. Ileostomy closure should not be delayed because of adjuvant chemotherapy. However, follow-up should be strengthened to increase compliance and integrity with chemotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of Huachansu combined with adjuvant chemotherapy in resected colorectal cancer patients: a prospective, open-label, randomized phase II study

Although some studies in China have suggested Huachansu (HCS) combined with chemotherapy is effective in the treatment of various cancers, there are few studies on colorectal cancer (CRC), especially in postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that HCS combined with adjuvant chemotherapy would improve survival probability in resected CRC patients. This was a prospective, open-label, randomized phase II study. Patients with stage III or high-risk stage II resected CRC were randomly assigned to the chemotherapy and HCS + chemotherapy groups. The Chemotherapy group was treated with the FOLFOX regimen for ≥ 6 cycles or the CAPEOX regimen for ≥ 4 cycles. The HCS + chemotherapy group was treated with HCS on the basis of the chemotherapy group. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary endpoints were 3-year overall survival (OS) and toxicity. A total of 250 patients were included in this study (126 chemotherapy, 124 HCS + chemotherapy). There were significant differences in 3-year DFS between the two groups (median 28.7 vs. 31.6 months, respectively; P = 0.027), but no significant differences in 3-year OS between the two groups (median 32.7 vs. 34 months, respectively; P = 0.146). No patients experienced grade four adverse events, and the rates of leukopenia, neutropenia, and diarrhea in the HCS + chemotherapy group were lower than that those in the chemotherapy group. HCS combined with adjuvant chemotherapy after radical resection for patients with stage III or high-risk stage II CRC was demonstrated to be an effective and feasible treatment.

The use of adjuvant chemotherapy is not associated with recurrence or cancer-specific death following curative resection for stage III rectal cancer: a competing risks analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in stage III rectal cancer (RC) has been argued based on evidence from its use in colon cancer. Previous trials have analysed disease-free and overall survivals as endpoints, rather than disease recurrence. This study compares the competing risks incidences of recurrence and cancer-specific death between patients who did and did not receive AC for stage III RC.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for stage III RC (1995-2019) at Concord Hospital, Sydney, Australia, were studied. AC was considered following multidisciplinary discussion. Primary outcome measures were the competing risks incidences of disease recurrence and cancer-specific death. Associations between these outcomes and use of AC (and other variables) were tested by regression modelling.

RESULTS

Some 338 patients (213 male, mean age 64.4 years [SD12.7]) were included. Of these, 208 received AC. The use of AC was associated with resection year (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.74, 95%CI 1.27-2.38); age ≥75 years (aOR0.04, 95%CI 0.02-0.12); peripheral vascular disease (aOR0.08, 95%CI 0.01-0.74); and postoperative abdomino-pelvic abscess (aOR0.23, 95%CI 0.07-0.81). One hundred fifty-seven patients (46.5%) were diagnosed with recurrence; death due to RC occurred in 119 (35.2%). After adjustment for the competing risk of non-cancer death, neither recurrence nor RC-specific death was associated with AC (HR0.97, 95%CI 0.70-1.33 and HR0.72, 95%CI 0.50-1.03, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study found no significant difference in either recurrence or cancer-specific death between patients who did and did not receive AC following curative resection for stage III RC.

Oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for pathological N2M0 colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and effective for patients with N2M0 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes between MIS and open surgery (Open) groups for patients with pathological (p)N2M0 CRC, and evaluate the oncological outcomes of MIS for pN2M0 CRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 125 consecutive patients with pN2M0 CRC who underwent curative surgery between 2010 and 2017, using propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 59.4 months. After PSM, we enrolled 68 patients (n = 34 in each group). The conversion rate was 9.6% for the entire patient cohort and 5.9% for the matched cohort. In colon cancer (CC), short-term outcomes were similar between groups. On the other hand, in rectal cancer (RC), estimated blood loss, rate of anastomosis leakage, and length of postsurgical stay were lower in the MIS group than the Open group. R0 resection was achieved in all patients with MIS. No surgical mortality was encountered in any group. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of 3-year local recurrence rate, overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or recurrence-free survival among the entire patient cohort or the matched cohort, regardless of the primary tumor site (CC or RC). Surgical approach (MIS vs Open) had no significant influence on survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS is a safe and effective option for patients with pN2M0 CRC, with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes comparable to the open approach. MIS can be considered for patients with pN2M0 CRC.

The fetal outcomes after neoadjuvant platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy during pregnancy: analysis of three cases and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Data on the outcomes of fetus who are exposed to neoadjuvant platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy during pregnancy are lacking.

METHODS

Relevant data were abstracted from patients in our institution, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The primary assessment was the frequency of fetal death and congenital abnormalities. The secondary assessment was other negative fetal/infant outcomes including FGR, RDS, secondary malignant diseases and other recorded adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the three infants in our center who exposed to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy during pregnancy, the physical evaluation and qualified Denver Developmental Screening Test showed normal findings at the last follow-up (19-24 months). Hearing evaluation among three children also showed normal findings. Another 34 infants (including a twins) of 21 studies in previous studies who exposed to platinum and paclitaxel chemotherapy during pregnancy were included in the final analysis. Of the 37 infants identified, 24 were exposed to cisplatin plus paclitaxel, and 13 were exposed to carboplatin plus paclitaxel. None of the 37 fetuses was abortion or dead during the pregnancy. 97.3% (36/37) infants were delivered by cesareans and the median gestational ages of delivery were 34.76 weeks (95% CI, 34.08-35.44). 1 fetus showed intrauterine growth restriction and one was found with left-sided ventriculomegaly and hydramnios before chemotherapy. Adverse events occurred in 18.9% (7/37) infants at birth, including two RDS, one hearing loss, one pathological jaundice, one first-degree intraventricular hemorrhage, one erythema, one corresponding to -0.5 standard deviation from average body weight of the same gestational weeks. No reports of neonatal cardiologic abnormalities are reported in these infants after the initiating of chemotherapy. The infant with congenital anomaly died 5 days after birth. During the follow-up, 5.4% (2/37) of the infants were diagnosed with malignant diseases. One retroperitoneal embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma at 5 years old and one acute myeloid leukemia at 22 months of age. 32/37 (86.5%) children were healthy at the end of follow-ups (median 33 months, IQR 15.75-54.25 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that neoadjuvant platinum and paclitaxel combined chemotherapy was a feasible and safe choice for the management of patients with cervical and ovarian cancer during the second and third trimesters of gestation.

Downstaged ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy may not need adjuvant chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Current guidelines suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) be administered to all locally advanced (clinically T3-4 or N-positivity) rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and radical surgical resection regardless of the final pathological staging (yp staging). This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of AC for ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer, who received nCRT and radical surgical resection, were recruited retrospectively at a university hospital. The main outcome was to evaluate the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer patients with AC and those without AC. We also identified potential independent prognostic factors associated with poor outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred and ten ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer patients (ypT0: n = 6; ypT1: n = 44; ypT2: n = 60) were followed up for a median of 60 months. No significant difference was observed in DFS and 5-year OS between patients with AC and those without AC. The risk of recurrence was associated with the postoperative pathological staging (0% with ypT0, 2.4% with ypT1, and 10% with ypT2). In the multivariate analysis, retrieval of < 12 lymph nodes was an independent favorable prognostic factor, which correlated with a higher OS (HR: 2.263; 95% CI: 1.093-4.687, P = 0.028). Intra-tumor lymphovascular and perineural invasion were poor prognostic markers for shorter DFS (HR: 5.940; 95% CI: 1.150-30.696, P = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative AC is not required for patients with ypT0-2N0 rectal cancer downstaged by nCRT, especially in those without poor prognostic factors.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer: state of the art and future perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The value of adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer is controversial with opinions varying from 'not be used' since randomized trials have not shown significant gains to 'be used as in colon cancer' as the need is the same and colon and rectal cancers are quite similar. This review will look upon data critically and with open eyes.

RECENT FINDINGS

With the exception of one randomized phase II trial (ADORE) revealing a significant gain in disease-free survival using one more effective regimen (mFOLFOX) than bolus 5-fluorouracil leucovorin, no new data have been presented. However, bringing up aspects in previous trials, either considered irrelevant for the present situation or overall negative, of what adjuvant treatment can achieve, a small reduction (hazard ratio about 0.8) in the risk of recurrence is present. This reduction is not fundamentally different from that in colon cancer considering that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer cannot be initiated as rapidly as it can after a colon cancer diagnosis.

SUMMARY

Adjuvant chemotherapy after rectal cancer surgery reduces recurrence risks but the benefit is limited and for most patients not clinically relevant. Neoadjuvant therapy can be more effective but results from randomized trials are not yet available.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Elderly Colorectal Cancer Patients

The value of adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients has been the subject of many overviews, with opinions varying from “not effective”, since randomized trials have not been performed, to “as effective as in young individuals”, based upon many retrospective analyses of randomized trials that have included patients of all ages. In the absence of randomized trials performed specifically with elderly patients, retrospective analyses demonstrate that the influence on the time to tumour recurrence (TTR) may be the same as in young individuals, but that endpoints that include death for any reason, such as recurrence-free survival (RFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), are poorer in the elderly. This is particularly true if oxaliplatin has been part of the treatment. The need for adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients is basically the same as that in younger patients. The reduction in recurrence risks may be similar, provided the chosen treatment is tolerated but survival gains are less. Adding oxaliplatin to a fluoropyrimidine is probably not beneficial in individuals above a biological age of approximately 70 years. If an oxaliplatin combination is administered to elderly patients, three months of therapy is in all probability the most realistic goal.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer: Current evidence and recommendations for clinical practice

While adjuvant chemotherapy is an established treatment for pathological stage II and especially stage III colon cancer, its role in the multimodal management of rectal cancer remains controversial. As a result, there is substantial variation in the use of this treatment in clinical practice. Even among centres and physicians who consider adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard treatment, notable heterogeneity exists with regard to patient selection criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The controversy around this topic is confirmed by the lack of full consensus among national and international clinical guidelines. While most of the clinical trials do not support the contention that adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival outcomes if pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy is also given, these suffer from many limitations that preclude drawing definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, in the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians should be guided by the available data and refrain from extrapolating results of adjuvant colon cancer trials to inform treatment decisions for rectal cancer. Patients should be informed of the evidence gap, be given the opportunity to carefully discuss pros and cons of all the possible management options and be empowered in the decision making. In this article we review the available evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer and propose a risk-adapted decisional algorithm that largely relies on informed patient preferences.

Surgical treatment and survival from colorectal cancer in Denmark, England, Norway, and Sweden: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Survival from colorectal cancer has been shown to be lower in Denmark and England than in comparable high-income countries. We used data from national colorectal cancer registries to assess whether differences in the proportion of patients receiving resectional surgery could contribute to international differences in colorectal cancer survival.

METHODS

In this population-based study, we collected data from all patients aged 18-99 years diagnosed with primary, invasive, colorectal adenocarcinoma from Jan 1, 2010, to Dec 31, 2012, in Denmark, England, Norway, and Sweden, from national colorectal cancer registries. We estimated age-standardised net survival using multivariable modelling, and we compared the proportion of patients receiving resectional surgery by stage and age. We used logistic regression to predict the resectional surgery status patients would have had if they had been treated as in the best performing country, given their individual characteristics.

FINDINGS

We extracted registry data for 139 457 adult patients with invasive colorectal adenocarcinoma: 12 958 patients in Denmark, 97 466 in England, 11 450 in Norway, and 17 583 in Sweden. 3-year colon cancer survival was lower in England (63·9%, 95% CI 63·5-64·3) and Denmark (65·7%, 64·7-66·8) than in Norway (69·5%, 68·4-70·5) and Sweden (72·1%, 71·2-73·0). Rectal cancer survival was lower in England (69·7%, 69·1-70·3) than in the other three countries (Denmark 72·5%, 71·1-74·0; Sweden 74·1%, 72·7-75·4; and Norway 75·0%, 73·1-76·8). We found no significant differences in survival for patients with stage I disease in any of the four countries. 3-year survival after stage II or III rectal cancer and stage IV colon cancer was consistently lower in England (stage II rectal cancer 86·4%, 95% CI 85·0-87·6; stage III rectal cancer 75·5%, 74·2-76·7; and stage IV colon cancer 20·5%, 19·9-21·1) than in Norway (94·1%, 91·5-96·0; 83·4%, 80·1-86·1; and 33·0%, 31·0-35·1) and Sweden (92·9%, 90·8-94·6; 80·6%, 78·2-82·7; and 23·7%, 22·0-25·3). 3-year survival after stage II rectal cancer and stage IV colon cancer was also lower in England than in Denmark (stage II rectal cancer 91·2%, 88·8-93·1; and stage IV colon cancer 23·5%, 21·9-25·1). The total proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery ranged from 47 803 (68·4%) of 69 867 patients in England to 9582 (81·3%) of 11 786 in Sweden for colon cancer, and from 16 544 (59·9%) of 27 599 in England to 4106 (70·8%) of 5797 in Sweden for rectal cancer. This range was widest for patients older than 75 years (colon cancer 19 078 [59·7%] of 31 946 patients in England to 4429 [80·9%] of 5474 in Sweden; rectal cancer 4663 [45·7%] of 10 195 in England to 1342 [61·9%] of 2169 in Sweden), and the proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery was consistently lowest in England. The age gradient of the decline in the proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery was steeper in England than in the other three countries in all stage categories. In the hypothetical scenario where all patients were treated as in Sweden, given their age, sex, and disease stage, the largest increase in resectional surgery would be for patients with stage III rectal cancer in England (increasing from 70·3% to 88·2%).

INTERPRETATION

Survival from colon cancer and rectal cancer in England and colon cancer in Denmark was lower than in Norway and Sweden. Survival paralleled the relative provision of resectional surgery in these countries. Differences in patient selection for surgery, especially in patients older than 75 years or individuals with advanced disease, might partly explain these differences in international colorectal cancer survival.

FUNDING

Early Diagnosis Policy Research Grant from Cancer Research UK (C7923/A18348).

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.

Antineoplastic Agents and (In)fertility: Informing Patients to Improve Decisions

PURPOSE

Infertility is a potential adverse effect of cancer treatment, and future fertility is an important issue for cancer patients. In Portugal, the Centre for Fertility Preservation of CHUC, EPE, conducted a project to develop and disseminate oncofertility information resources. In this study, we report the results of the specific component of this program, which intended to produce information resources that promote patients' awareness of the subject and to support decisions concerning fertility preservation.

METHODS

Guidance for writing health information for patients and criteria for developing decision aids were gathered. Information needs were assessed (literature review and locally applied questionnaire). Resources were pre-tested with a sample of patients and professionals. Their readability, presentation quality, and ability to support decisions were evaluated.

RESULTS

General information handouts on infertility risk and decision aids about fertility preservation options were developed and positively evaluated. The resources are currently being distributed in collaboration with several national organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Through our multidisciplinary information program, reproductive-age cancer patients now have access to relevant information resources that will support timely, shared decision-making concerning fertility preservation.

Patients with pathological stage N2 rectal cancer treated with early adjuvant chemotherapy have a lower treatment failure rate

Background

In this era of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy, the optimal sequence in which chemoradiotherapy should be administered for pathological stage N2 rectal cancer is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate this sequence.

Methods

In the primary adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (A-CRT) group (n = 71), postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy was administered before adjuvant chemotherapy. In the primary adjuvant chemotherapy (A-CT) group (n = 43), postoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy was administered during or after adjuvant chemotherapy. Postoperative radiotherapy comprised 45–50.4 Gy in 25–28 fractions. Concurrent chemotherapy comprised two cycles of oral capecitabine (1,600 mg/m²) on days 1–14 and 22–35. Patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with four or more cycles of XELOX (oxaliplatin plus capecitabine) or eight or more cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) were included.

Results

Between June 2005 and December 2013, data for 114 qualified rectal cancer patients were analyzed. The percentages of patients in whom treatment failed in the A-CRT and A-CT groups were 33.8% and 16.3%, respectively (p = 0.042). More patients had distant metastases in the A-CRT group than in the A-CT group (32.4% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.028). Multivariate analysis indicated that the sequence in which chemoradiotherapy was administered (A-CT vs. A-CRT) was an independent prognostic factor for both estimated disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 0.345, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.137–0.868, p = 0.024] and estimated distant metastasis-free survival (HR 0.366, 95% CI 0.143–0.938, p = 0.036).

Conclusions

In pathological stage N2 rectal cancer patients, administering adjuvant chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy led to a lower rate of treatment failure, especially with respect to distant metastasis. Adjuvant chemotherapy prescribed as early as possible might benefit this cohort of patients in this era of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy.

Effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on recurrence-free survival varies by neo-adjuvant treatment in patients with stage III rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant chemotherapy still is a controversial therapy for rectal cancer patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with stage III rectal cancer treated in clinical practice, taking into account which neo-adjuvant treatment patients received.

METHODS

Patients from regions in the Netherlands diagnosed between 1996 and 2013 with pathological stage III rectal cancer who received short-course radiotherapy, chemoradiation or no neo-adjuvant treatment and who underwent surgery were included. After stratification by neo-adjuvant treatment, 5-year RFS according to adjuvant chemotherapy receipt was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox regression was used to discriminate the independent effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on the risk of recurrence/death.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 829 patients, of whom 537 (65%) patients received short-course radiotherapy, 128 (15%) patients received chemoradiation and 164 (20%) patients received no neo-adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 152 (18%) patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved 5-year RFS for patients who received short-course radiotherapy (61% vs. 46%, p = 0.005) and for patients who did not receive any neo-adjuvant treatment (70% vs. 28%, p < 0.0001). In multivariable analyses, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a reduced risk of recurrence/death for patients treated with short-course radiotherapy (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.93) and for patients without neo-adjuvant treatment (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18-0.71), but not for patients treated with chemoradiation (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.51-2.41).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with stage III rectal cancer, the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on RFS seems to vary by neo-adjuvant treatment.

The predicting value of postoperative body temperature on long-term survival in patients with rectal cancer

This study aimed to assess the association between postoperative body temperature and prognosis in patients with rectal cancer. Five hundred and seven patients with stage I to III rectal cancers were enrolled in the current study. Basal body temperature (BBT, measured at 6 am) and maximal body temperature (MBT) on each day after surgery were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two equal groups according to the median of BBT and MBT at each day. The primary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The univariate and multivariate analyses showed that patients with low D0-MBT (<37.4 °C) had lower 3-year DFS [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.56 (95 % CI 1.08-2.24, P = 0.017)] as well as OS [adjusted HR 1.72 (95 % CI 1.05-2.82, P = 0.032)] rate as compared to those with high D0-MBT (>37.4 °C). In the subset of 318 patients with T3 stage tumor and the subgroup of 458 patients without blood transfusion as well, low D0-MBT continues to be an independent predictor of DFS/OS with an adjusted HR equal to 1.48 (95 % CI 1.02-2.24, P = 0.046)/1.68 (95 % CI 1.04-2.99, P = 0.048) and 1.45 (95 % CI 1.02-2.13, P = 0.048)/1.59 (95 % CI 1.01-2.74, P = 0.049), respectively. In addition, we found that patients have higher risk of 1-year recurrence if those were exhibiting low preoperative BBT (<36.6 °C) (17 vs. 10 %, P = 0.034). Low body temperature (D0-MBT < 37.4 °C) after surgery was an independent predictor of poor survival outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.

Postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy: A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing surgery ± a fluoropyrimidine and surgery + a fluoropyrimidine ± oxaliplatin

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the role of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer who have received preoperative radio(chemo)therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed of trials that used preoperative radio(chemo)therapy and randomized patients either between postoperative chemotherapy and observation or between a fluoropyrimidine only (FU-only) and a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin (FU-OXA) as postoperative chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Five randomized studies compared postoperative chemotherapy with observation in a total of 2398 patients. None of these trials demonstrated a statistically significant benefit of chemotherapy for OS and DFS. The pooled differences in OS and DFS did not differ statistically significantly between the chemotherapy group and the observation group. The hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.95 (CI: 0.82-1.10), P = 0.49 and 0.92 (CI: 0.80-1.04), P = 0.19, respectively. In the subgroup of trials in which randomization was performed after surgery (n = 753), a statistically significant positive pooled chemotherapy effect was observed for DFS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.62-1.00, P = 0.047), but not for OS (P = 0.39). Four randomized trials compared adjuvant FU-OXA with adjuvant FU-only in 2710 patients. In two trials, the difference in DFS between groups was statistically significant in favour of FU-OXA, and in the other two trials, the difference was not significant. The pooled difference in DFS between the FU-OXA group and the FU-only group was not statistically significant: HR = 0.84 (CI: 0.66-1.06), P = 0.15.

CONCLUSION

The use of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative radio(chemo)therapy is not based on strong scientific evidence.

Review on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer - why do treatment guidelines differ so much?

BACKGROUND

The use of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is controversial for rectal adenocarcinoma. Both international and national guidelines display a great span varying from recommending no adjuvant chemotherapy at all, over single drug 5-fluororuacil (5-FU), to combinations of 5-FU/oxaliplatin.

METHODS

A review of the literature was made identifying 24 randomized controlled trials on adjuvant treatment of rectal cancer based on about 10 000 patients. The trials were subdivided into a number of clinically relevant subgroups.

RESULTS

As regards patients treated with preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy, four randomized studies were found where use of adjuvant chemotherapy showed no benefit in survival. Three trials were found in which a subset of patients received preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy. Two of these trials showed a statistically significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty trials were identified in which the patients did not receive preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy, including five Asian studies in which a statistically significant benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the data found did not support the use of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients already treated with preoperative (chemo) radiotherapy. For patients not treated preoperatively, several studies support the use of single agent 5-FU chemotherapy. Treatment guidelines seem to differ according to if preoperative chemoradiation is considered of importance for use of adjuvant chemotherapy and if adjuvant colon cancer studies are considered transferrable to rectal cancer patients regardless of the molecular differences.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant treatment and surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CTRT) and surgery to treat rectal cancer, although clinical trials have provided little evidence that it is effective. We performed a systematic review of published studies to assess whether adjuvant CT improves outcome after neoadjuvant therapy and radical surgery in cases of rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an electronic database search for randomized and nonrandomized studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. We then carried out a meta-analysis by using the fixed- or random-effects models. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS) reported as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one pooled analysis of five RCTs and 10 retrospective studies that included a total of 5,457 patients matched our selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed that for rectal cancer patients treated with surgery and neoadjuvant CTRT, adjuvant CT improves 5-year OS (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.88; p = 0.006) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.6-0.83; p < 0.0001). The 5-year OS benefit was significantly larger in downstaged patients and in retrospective series. A better DFS was instead noted in all studies due to a reduced risk of local relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, adjuvant CT seems to improve the 5-year DFS and OS rates and may be discussed with patients. However, the benefit derives mainly from retrospective evidence.

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic marker in the modern multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A positive circumferential resection margin has been associated with a high risk of local recurrence and a decrease in survival in patients who have rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the involvement of circumferential resection margin in local recurrence and survival in a multidisciplinary population-based setting by using tailored oncological therapy and surgery with total mesorectal excision.

DESIGN

Data were collected in a prospective database and retrospectively analyzed. Between 1996 and 2009, 448 patients with rectal cancer underwent a curative bowel resection.

SETTINGS

Population-based data were collected at a single institution in the county of Västmanland, Sweden.

RESULTS

Preoperative radiotherapy was delivered to 334 patients (74%); it was delivered to 35 patients (8%) concomitantly with preoperative chemotherapy. In 70 patients (16%), en bloc resections of the prostate and vagina were performed. Intraoperative perforations were seen in 7 patients (1.6%). The mesorectal fascia was assessed as complete in 117/118 cases. In 32 cases (7%), the circumferential resection margin was 1 mm or less. After a median follow-up of 68 months, 5 (1.1%) patients developed a local recurrence; one of them had circumferential resection margin involvement. The 5-year overall survival was 77%. In the multivariate analysis, the circumferential resection margin was not an independent factor for disease-free survival.

LIMITATIONS

Mesorectal fascia was not assessed before 2007. The findings might be explained by a type II error but, from a clinical perspective, enough patients were included to motivate the conclusion of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Circumferential resection margin is an important measurement in rectal cancer pathology, but the correlation to local recurrence is much less than previously stated, probably because of oncological treatment and surgery that respects the mesorectal fascia and, when required, en bloc resections. Circumferential resection margin should not be used as a prognostic marker in the modern multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.

Systematic Review: Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer with respect to Stage of Disease

Background. Recent meta-analysis of 21 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) supports the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for nonmetastatic rectal carcinoma. In order to define a subgroup of patients who can potentially benefit from postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, this study aims to review trials investigating adjuvant chemotherapy with respect to stage of disease in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who had undergone surgery for cure (stage II and stage III). Methods. We searched electronic information sources to identify randomised trials evaluating adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stages II and III rectal cancer with overall survival or disease-free survival as outcomes. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network notes on methodology were used to assess the methodological quality of the selected studies. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Results. Eight studies reporting total of 5527 patients were selected for analysis. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with statistically significant improvement in disease-free survival and overall survival compared to surgery alone in both stage II and stage III cancer. Conclusions. This study indicates that both stage II and stage III rectal cancer patients may benefit from postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who already had neoadjuvant chemoradiation still remain unknown.

A population-based cohort study on adherence to practice guidelines for adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The value of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer is well studied, and guidelines have been established. Little is known about how treatment guidelines are implemented in the everyday clinical setting.

METHODS

This national population-based study on nearly 34,000 patients with colorectal cancer evaluates the adherence to present clinical guidelines for adjuvant chemotherapy. Virtually all patients with colorectal cancer in Sweden during the years 2007-2012 and data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry were included.

RESULTS

In colon cancer stage III, adherence to national guidelines was associated with lower age, presence of multidisciplinary team (MDT) conference, low co-morbidity, and worse N stage. The MDT forum also affected whether or not high-risk stage II colon cancer patients were considered for adjuvant chemotherapy. Rectal cancer patients both in stage II and III were considered for adjuvant chemotherapy less often than colon cancer patients, but the same factors influenced the decision. Adjuvant chemotherapy was started later than eight weeks after surgery in 30% of colon cancer patients and in 38% of rectal cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In Sweden, the adherence to national guidelines for adjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer stage III is acceptable in younger and healthier patients. MDT conferences are of major importance and affect whether patients are recommended for adjuvant chemotherapy. Special consideration needs to be given to certain subgroups of patients, particularly older patients and patients with poorly differentiated tumors. There is a need to shorten the waiting time until start of chemotherapy.

New trends in rectal cancer treatment

SUMMARY 

The treatment philosophy for rectal cancer has changed a lot during the last three decades. In the 1970s it was more or less a pure surgical business and rectal cancer was considered radiation resistant. Owing to the unacceptable high local recurrence rates, surgery was changed (the total mesorectal excision technique) during the 1980s and treatment was, in many countries, concentrated to lager units. Moreover, the addition of adjuvant radiotherapy was tested during the same period in several randomized trials and demonstrated that the local recurrence rate could be reduced by 50%, provided the radiation dose was high enough. Since then, treatment has changed very rapidly with several interesting approaches, such as timing and type of radiotherapy, the place of chemotherapy, surgery with modern technique including laparoscopy; natural orifice transendoscopic surgery or robotics; and the whole idea of ‘wait-and-watch’ program. All of these new aspects are covered and discussed in the view of the standard-of-care in 2014.