Postoperative irinotecan in resected stage II-III rectal cancer: final analysis of the French R98 Intergroup trial†

Quality of Surgical Outcome Reporting in Randomised Clinical Trials of Multimodal Rectal Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) continue to provide the best evidence for treatment options, but the quality of reporting in RCTs and the completeness rate of reporting of surgical outcomes and complication data vary widely. The aim of this study was to measure the quality of reporting of the surgical outcome and complication data in RCTs of rectal cancer treatment and whether this quality has changed over time.

METHODS

Eligible articles with the keywords ("rectal cancer" OR "rectal carcinoma") AND ("radiation" OR "radiotherapy") that were RCTs and published in the English, German, Polish, or Italian language were identified by reviewing all abstracts published from 1982 through 2022. Two authors independently screened and analysed all studies. The quality of the surgical outcome and complication data was assessed based on fourteen criteria, and the quality of RCTs was evaluated based on a modified Jadad scale. The primary outcome was the quality of reporting in RCTs and the completeness rate of reporting of surgical results and complication data.

RESULTS

A total of 340 articles reporting multimodal therapy outcomes for 143,576 rectal cancer patients were analysed. A total of 7 articles (2%) met all 14 reporting criteria, 13 met 13 criteria, 27 met from 11 to 12 criteria, 36 met from 9 to 10 criteria, 76 met from 7 to 8 criteria, and most articles met fewer than 7 criteria (mean 5.5 criteria). Commonly underreported criteria included complication severity (15% of articles), macroscopic integrity of mesorectal excision (17% of articles), length of stay (18% of articles), number of lymph nodes (21% of articles), distance between the tumour and circumferential resection margin (CRM) (26% of articles), surgical radicality according to the site of the primary tumour (R0 vs. R1 + R2) (29% of articles), and CRM status (38% of articles).

CONCLUSION

Inconsistent surgical outcome and complication data reporting in multimodal rectal cancer treatment RCTs is standard. Standardised reporting of clinical and oncological outcomes should be established to facilitate comparing studies and results of related research topics.

Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in resectable rectal cancer after preoperative short-course radiotherapy-results from randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The value of the lymph node ratio (LNR) in patients with rectal cancer has not yet been unequivocally established. This study aims to assess the effect of the lymph node ratio on the prognosis of rectal cancer in patients operated after short-course preoperative 25 Gy radiotherapy, at 10-year follow-up.

METHODS

This is a substudy based on data from a prospective randomized clinical trial. A total of 141 patients with resectable rectal cancer were included. Lymph node yield was compared in patients with short and long time intervals between radiotherapy and surgery. Survival curves were compared between patients with different ypN and LNR categories. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent prognostic factors for overall survival and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

Survival and recurrence data were available for a median follow-up of 11.6 years. The lymph node yield did not differ significantly between the patients in the short- and long-interval groups. A greater difference in 10-year survival was observed in patients with LNR ≤ 0.41 and > 0.41 when compared to the ypN categories. Separate prognostic factor analyses were performed for the entire population and for subgroups that had < 12 and 12 lymph nodes resected. LNR was identified as an independent prognostic factor for overall survival, in multivariate analyses, for all patients and those with less than 12 retrieved lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

The lymph node yield is comparable in patients with different time intervals between radiation therapy and surgery. LNR better discriminates patients in terms of overall survival than ypN categories.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01444495, date of registration: September 30, 2011.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibition as a Strategy in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has seen major advances over the past 3 decades, with multimodality treatment now standard of care. Combining surgical resection with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy can reduce local recurrence from around 20% to approximately 5%. Despite improvements in local control, distant recurrence and subsequent survival rates have not changed. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have improved patient outcomes in several solid tumor types in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and advanced disease setting; however, in colorectal cancer, most clinical trials have been performed in the metastatic setting and the benefits confined to microsatellite instability-high tumors. In this article, we review the current preclinical and clinical evidence for using immune checkpoint inhibition in the treatment of LARC and discuss the rationale for specifically exploring the use of this therapy in the neoadjuvant setting. We summarize and discuss relevant clinical trials that are currently in setup and recruiting to test this treatment strategy and reflect on unanswered questions that still need to be addressed within future research efforts.

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.

CA19-9 Concentration After First-line Chemotherapy Is Prognostic Predictor of Metastatic Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

To evaluate whether the serum levels of CEA or CA19-9 concentration is a useful predictor of survival in patients with metastatic colon cancer (mCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 2012 and 2015, 113 patients with mCC who underwent chemotherapy according to the Japanese Colorectal Cancer Treatment Guidelines at four Jikei University Hospitals were enrolled in this study. The two serum tumor makers, CEA and CA19-9 were measured before first-line chemotherapy and at four months thereafter.

RESULTS

Serum CA19-9 concentration at four months after first-line chemotherapy (p=0.003, HR=3.761) and first-line chemotherapy including oxaliplatin (p=0.038, HR=0.312) were independent predictors of survival in patients with mCC. By excluding the transverse colon, only serum CA19-9 concentration at four months after first-line chemotherapy (p=0.005, HR=3.660) was identified as the predictor of survival.

CONCLUSION

Serum CA19-9 concentration after first-line chemotherapy seems to be a useful predictor of survival in patients with mCC.

Irinotecan toxicity during treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: focus on pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine

Colorectal cancer, one of the most frequent types of cancer worldwide, has a high mortality rate. Irinotecan (CPT-11) has been approved for the treatment of advanced or metastatic disease either as a single agent or, more commonly, as part of combined chemotherapeutic regimens. Treatment with irinotecan is often accompanied by severe toxicity (e.g. neutropenia and diarrhea) that can result in treatment interruption or cessation, thus jeopardizing the patient's prognosis and quality of life. Irinotecan is bioactivated into its metabolite SN-38, which is subsequently detoxified by uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyl transferases (mainly UGT1A1). Further, ABC transporters (i.e. ABCB1, ABCC1-ABCC6, and ABCG2) are responsible for drug efflux into bile and urine whereas OATP transporters (SLCO1B1) enable its influx from blood into hepatocytes. Genetic polymorphisms in these enzymes/pumps may result in increased systemic SN-38 level, directly correlating with toxicity. Contemporary research is focused on the clinical implementation of genetic screenings for validated gene variations prior to treatment onset, allowing tailored individual doses or treatment regimens.

Drug Combinations in Preoperative Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer

Preoperative radiotherapy has an accepted role in reducing the risk of local recurrence in locally advanced resectable rectal cancer, particularly when the circumferential resection margin is breached or threatened, according to magnetic resonance imaging. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiation can obtain a significant down-sizing response and a curative resection can then be achieved. Approximately, 20% of the patients can also obtain a pathological complete response, which is associated with less local recurrences and increased survival. Patients who achieve a sustained complete clinical response may also avoid radical surgery. In unresectable or borderline resectable tumors, around 20% of the patients still fail to achieve a sufficient down-staging response with the current chemoradiation schedules. Hence, investigators have aspired to increase pathological complete response rates, aiming to improve curative resection rates, enhance survival, and potentially avoid mutilating surgery. However, adding additional cytotoxic or biological agents have not produced dramatic improvements in outcome and often led to excess surgical morbidity and higher levels of acute toxicity, which effects on compliance and in the global efficacy of chemoradiation.