Practice patterns and long-term survival for early-stage rectal cancer

Oncologic safety and technical feasibility of completion transanal total mesorectal excision after local excision; a cohort study from the International TaTME Registry

BACKGROUND

As part of an organ sparing strategy, a surgical local excision may be performed in patients with early-stage rectal cancer or following neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. In selected cases, a completion total mesorectal excision may be recommended which can be more complex because of the preceding local excision. A transanal approach to perform completion total mesorectal excision may offer an advantage through the better visualization of the surgical field in the distal rectum and less forceful retraction for exposure. However, the oncologic safety and technical feasibility of this approach have yet to be demonstrated in these patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological and technical safety of completion transanal total mesorectal excision following a local excision in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients from the prospective International Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Registry who underwent a surgical local excision prior to completion transanal total mesorectal excision were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 189 patients were included of which 22% received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. In 94% of the patients, a low anterior resection was performed. A primary anastomosis was constructed in 91% (n = 171/189) of the patients, with the majority also receiving a defunctioning stoma (84%, n = 144/171), of which 69% (n = 100/144) were reversed. Within 30 days, 7% developed an anastomotic leakage. The two-year local recurrence rate was 5% (n = 5/104) with an estimated rate of 3% (95% CI 0-7%). Two-year disease-free survival was 85% (n = 88/104) and overall survival was 95% (n = 99/104).

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal completion total mesorectal excision following local excision for rectal cancer is oncologically safe, with low complication rates and high restorative rates.

Contemporary practices in abdominoperineal resection for early-stage rectal cancer in the United States

AIM

In contrast to significant advances in organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancer, the contemporary management of early-stage rectal cancer, including the frequency of abdominoperineal resections, remains largely unexplored in the United States. Therefore, we assessed the utilization of neoadjuvant therapy and oncological resections in early-stage rectal cancer patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with cT1-T3N0 rectal cancer who underwent proctectomies between 2016 and 2022 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project proctectomy files. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with abdominoperineal resections and Kendall's tau statistics to evaluate clinical-pathological staging agreement.

RESULTS

In all, 3078 patients (29.6% cT1-2N0, 70.4% cT3N0) were included with 55.3% of tumours <5 cm from the anal verge. Overall, 58.2% received neoadjuvant therapy within 3 months of surgery (30.6% for cT1-T2N0 vs. 69.8% for cT3N0, P < 0.001), and 58.6% underwent abdominoperineal resection (55.5% for cT1-T2N0 vs. 59.9% for cT3N0, P = 0.058). The adjusted odds of undergoing abdominoperineal resection were associated with increasing age (OR 1.4 per every 10-year increase; 95% CI 1.2-1.5), cT3N0 tumours (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7) and tumour location <5 cm from the anal verge (OR 10.6; 95% CI 7.7-14.7). There was a weak clinical-pathological T staging correlation (Kendal tau coefficient 0.25; 95% CI 0.20-0.29).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of patients with early-stage rectal cancer with high rates of neoadjuvant therapy, over half of patients underwent abdominoperineal resection and one in five had a pathological complete response. These findings underscore opportunities for organ preservation in early-stage rectal cancer, suggesting that treatments typically reserved for locally advanced disease may extend to early stages with the completion of ongoing clinical trials.

Practice Patterns for Organ Preservation in US Patients With Rectal Cancer, 2006-2020

Importance

In March 2023, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network endorsed watch and wait for those with complete clinical response to total neoadjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy is highly efficacious, so this recommendation may have broad implications, but the current trends in organ preservation in the US are unknown.

Objective

To describe organ preservation trends among patients with rectal cancer in the US from 2006 to 2020.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, observational case series included adults (aged ≥18 years) with rectal adenocarcinoma managed with curative intent from 2006 to 2020 in the National Cancer Database.

Exposure

The year of treatment was the primary exposure. The type of therapy was chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery (proctectomy, transanal local excision, no tumor resection). The timing of therapy was classified as neoadjuvant or adjuvant.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the absolute annual proportion of organ preservation after radical treatment, defined as chemotherapy and/or radiation without tumor resection, proctectomy, or transanal local excision. A secondary analysis examined complete pathologic responses among eligible patients.

Results

Of the 175 545 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 63 (13) years, 39.7% were female, 17.4% had clinical stage I disease, 24.7% had stage IIA to IIC disease, 32.1% had stage IIIA to IIIC disease, and 25.7% had unknown stage. The absolute annual proportion of organ preservation increased by 9.8 percentage points (from 18.4% in 2006 to 28.2% in 2020; P < .001). From 2006 to 2020, the absolute rate of organ preservation increased by 13.0 percentage points for patients with stage IIA to IIC disease (19.5% to 32.5%), 12.9 percentage points for patients with stage IIIA to IIC disease (16.2% to 29.1%), and 10.1 percentage points for unknown stages (16.5% to 26.6%; all P < .001). Conversely, patients with stage I disease experienced a 6.1-percentage point absolute decline in organ preservation (from 26.4% in 2006 to 20.3% in 2020; P < .001). The annual rate of transanal local excisions decreased for all stages. In the subgroup of 80 607 eligible patients, the proportion of complete pathologic responses increased from 6.5% in 2006 to 18.8% in 2020 (P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This case series shows that rectal cancer is increasingly being managed medically, especially among patients whose treatment historically relied on proctectomy. Given the National Comprehensive Cancer Network endorsement of watch and wait, the increasing trends in organ preservation, and the nearly 3-fold increase in complete pathologic responses, international professional societies should urgently develop multidisciplinary core outcome sets and care quality indicators to ensure high-quality rectal cancer research and care delivery accounting for organ preservation.

Excision of malignant and pre-malignant rectal lesions by transanal endoscopic microsurgery in patients under 50 years of age

BACKGROUND

The most common technique for treating benign and early malignant rectal lesions is transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Local excision is an acceptable technique for high-risk and elderly patients, but there are hardly any data regarding young patients.

AIM

To describe TEM outcomes in patients under 50 years of age.

METHODS

We collected demographic, clinical, and pathological data from all patients under the age of 50 years who underwent the TEM procedure at Hasharon Rabin Medical Center from January 2005 to December 2018.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 26 patients under the age of 50 years underwent TEM procedures. Their mean age was 43.3 years. Eleven (42.0%) were male. The mean operative time was 67 min, and the mean tumor size was 2.39 cm, with a mean anal verge distance of 8.50 cm. No major intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded. The median length of stay was 2 d. Seven (26.9%) lesions were adenomas with low-grade dysplasia, four (15.4%) were high-grade dysplasia adenomas, two were T1 carcinomas (7.8%), and three were T2 carcinomas (11.5%). No residual disease was found following endoscopic polypectomy in two patients (7.8%), but four (15.4%) had other pathologies. Surgical margins were negative in all cases. Local recurrence was detected in one patient 33 mo following surgery.

CONCLUSION

Among young adult patients, TEM for benign rectal lesions has excellent outcomes. It may also offer a balance between the efficacy of complete oncologic resection and postoperative quality of life in the treatment of rectal cancer. In some cases, it may be considered an alternative to radical surgery.

Differential Effects of Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Insurance on Disease-Specific Survival in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline adherence improves cancer outcomes. In rectal cancer, guideline adherence is distributed differently by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and insurance.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the independent effects of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and insurance status on rectal cancer survival after accounting for differences in guideline adherence.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted using the California Cancer Registry.

PATIENTS

This study included patients aged 18 to 79 years diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2017, with follow-up through November 30, 2018. Investigators determined whether patients received guideline-adherent care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

ORs and 95% CIs were used for logistic regression to analyze patients receiving guideline-adherent care. Disease-specific survival analysis was calculated using Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 30,118 patients were examined. Factors associated with higher odds of guideline adherence included Asian and Hispanic race/ethnicity, managed care insurance, and high socioeconomic status. Asians (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; p < 0.001) and Hispanics (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99; p = 0.0279) had better disease-specific survival in the nonadherent group. Race/ethnicity were not factors associated with disease-specific survival in the guideline adherent group. Medicaid disease-specific survival was worse in both the nonadherent group (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.40-1.73; p < 0.0001) and the guideline-adherent group (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30; p = 0.0005). Disease-specific survival of the lowest socioeconomic status was worse in both the nonadherent group (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.27-1.59) and the guideline-adherent group (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included unmeasured confounders and the retrospective nature of the review.

CONCLUSIONS

Race, socioeconomic status, and insurance are associated with guideline adherence in rectal cancer. Race/ethnicity was not associated with differences in disease-specific survival in the guideline-adherent group. Medicaid and lowest socioeconomic status had worse disease-specific survival in both the guideline nonadherent group and the guideline-adherent group. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B954 .

EFECTOS DIFERENCIALES DE LA RAZA, EL NIVEL SOCIOECONMICO COBERTURA SOBRE LA SUPERVIVENCIA ESPECFICA DE LA ENFERMEDAD EN EL CNCER DE RECTO

ANTECEDENTES: El cumplimiento de las guías de la National Comprehensive Cancer Network mejora los resultados del cáncer. En el cáncer de recto, el cumplimiento de las guías se distribuye de manera diferente según la raza/origen étnico, nivel socioeconómico y el cobertura médica.OBJETIVO: Determinar los efectos independientes de la raza/origen étnico, el nivel socioeconómico y el estado de cobertura médica en la supervivencia del cáncer de recto después de tener en cuenta las diferencias en el cumplimiento de las guías.DISEÑO: Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO: El estudio se realizó utilizando el Registro de Cáncer de California.PACIENTES: Pacientes de 18 a 79 años diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma rectal entre el 1 de enero de 2004 y el 31 de diciembre de 2017 con seguimiento hasta el 30 de noviembre de 2018. Los investigadores determinaron si los pacientes recibieron atención siguiendo las guías.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Se utilizaron razones de probabilidad e intervalos de confianza del 95 % para la regresión logística para analizar a los pacientes que recibían atención con adherencia a las guías. El análisis de supervivencia específico de la enfermedad se calculó utilizando modelos de regresión de Cox.RESULTADOS: Se analizaron un total de 30.118 pacientes. Los factores asociados con mayores probabilidades de cumplimiento de las guías incluyeron raza/etnicidad asiática e hispana, seguro de atención administrada y nivel socioeconómico alto. Los asiáticos e hispanos tuvieron una mejor supervivencia específica de la enfermedad en el grupo no adherente HR 0,80 (95 % CI 0,72 - 0,88, p < 0,001) y HR 0,91 (95 % CI 0,83 - 0,99, p = 0,0279). La raza o el origen étnico no fueron factores asociados con la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad en el grupo que cumplió con las guías. La supervivencia específica de la enfermedad de Medicaid fue peor tanto en el grupo no adherente HR 1,56 (IC del 95 % 1,40 - 1,73, p < 0,0001) como en el grupo adherente a las guías HR 1,18 (IC del 95 % 1,08 - 1,30, p = 0,0005). La supervivencia específica de la enfermedad del nivel socioeconómico más bajo fue peor tanto en el grupo no adherente HR 1,42 (IC del 95 %: 1,27 a 1,59) como en el grupo adherente a las guías HR 1,20 (IC del 95 %: 1,08 a 1,34).LIMITACIONES: Las limitaciones incluyeron factores de confusión no medidos y la naturaleza retrospectiva de la revisión.CONCLUSIONES: La raza, el nivel socioeconómico y cobertura médica están asociados con la adherencia a las guías en el cáncer de recto. La raza/etnicidad no se asoció con diferencias en la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad en el grupo que cumplió con las guías. Medicaid y el nivel socioeconómico más bajo tuvieron peor supervivencia específica de la enfermedad tanto en el grupo que no cumplió con las guías como en los grupos que cumplieron. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B954 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon).

Predictors and outcomes of positive surgical margins after local excision of clinical T1 rectal cancer: A National Cancer Database analysis

BACKGROUND

Transanal local excision and the use of specialized platforms has become increasingly popular for early-stage rectal cancer. Predictors and outcomes of positive resection margins following transanal local excision for early-stage rectal cancer have yet to be explored.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database of all patients with clinical nonmetastatic node negative T1 rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent transanal local excision from 2004 to 2017. Patients with positive surgical margins were compared to those with negative resection margins to determine factors associated with predictors and outcomes of positive surgical margins after transanal local excision. The main outcome measure was overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 318,548 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma in the National Cancer Database, 9,078 (2.8%) met the inclusion criteria. The positive surgical margins rate was 7.4%. Predictors of positive surgical margins were older age (odds ratio, 1.03; P < .001), higher Charlson comorbidity index (odds ratio, 1.24; P = .004), poorly differentiated carcinomas (odds ratio, 1.89; P < .001), mucinous (odds ratio, 2.36; P = .003) and signet-ring cell carcinomas (odds ratio, 4.7; P = .048). Independent predictors of reduced survival were older age (hazard ratio, 1.062; P < .001), male sex (hazard ratio, 1.214; P = .011), Charlson comorbidity index 3 (hazard ratio, 1.94; P < .001), pathologic T2 (hazard ratio, 1.27; P = .036) and T3 stages (hazard ratio, 1.77; P = .006), poorly differentiated carcinomas (hazard ratio, 1.47; P = .008), and positive surgical margins (hazard ratio, 1.374; P = .018). The positive surgical margins group's median overall survival was significantly shorter (88 vs 159.3 months, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Positive surgical margins after transanal local excision for early-stage node-negative rectal cancer adversely affects prognosis. Older male patients with higher Charlson comorbidity index scores and poorly differentiated mucinous or signet cell histology tumors are at risk for positive surgical margins. Patient selection according to these suggested criteria may help avoid positive surgical margins.

Lymph node metastasis in T1-2 colorectal cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

We performed this study to identify predictive factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) and analyze the impact of LNM on the prognosis of patients with T1-2 colorectal cancer (CRC), with the intention of providing guidance for the treatment.

METHODS

The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result database was used to identify 20,492 patients diagnosed with T1-2 stage CRC between 2010 and 2019, who underwent surgery and lymph node evaluation and had complete prognostic information. Clinicopathological data of patients with T1-2 stage colorectal cancer treated with surgery at Peking University People's Hospital from 2017 to 2021 with complete clinical information were retrieved. We identify and confirm the risk factors for positive lymph node involvement, and the results of follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

Age, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, perineural invasion, and primary tumor site were independent risk factors for LNM in T1-2 CRC based on the analysis of the SEER database, while tumor size and histology of mucinous carcinoma were also independent risk factors in T1 CRC. We then make the nomogram model for predicting LNM risk and showed an acceptable consistency and calibration capability. Survival analysis showed that LNM was an independent prognostic indicator of 5-year disease-specific survival (P = 0.013) and disease-free survival (P < 0.001) in patients with T1 and T2 CRC.

CONCLUSION

Age, CEA level and primary tumor site should be taken into consideration before making the surgical decision in T1-2 CRC patients. The tumor size and histology of mucinous carcinoma also need to be thought about in T1 CRC. Conventional imaging tests do not appear to provide a precise assessment for this issue.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Excision, and Observation for Early Rectal Cancer: The Phase II NEO Trial (CCTG CO.28) Primary End Point Results

PURPOSE

Organ-sparing therapy for early-stage I/IIA rectal cancer is intended to avoid functional disturbances or a permanent ostomy associated with total mesorectal excision (TME). The objective of this phase II trial was to determine the outcomes and organ-sparing rate of patients with early-stage rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by transanal excision surgery (TES).

METHODS

This phase II trial included patients with clinical T1-T3abN0 low- or mid-rectal adenocarcinoma eligible for endoscopic resection who were treated with 3 months of chemotherapy (modified folinic acid-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin 6 or capecitabine-oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of response proceeded to transanal endoscopic surgery 2-6 weeks later. The primary end point was protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1N0/X and who avoided radical surgery.

RESULTS

Of 58 patients enrolled, all commenced chemotherapy and 56 proceeded to surgery. A total of 33/58 patients had tumor downstaging to ypT0/1N0/X on the surgery specimen, resulting in an intention-to-treat protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI, 45 to 68). Of 23 remaining patients recommended for TME surgery on the basis of protocol requirements, 13 declined and elected to proceed directly to observation resulting in 79% (90% CI, 69 to 88) achieving organ preservation. The remaining 10/23 patients proceeded to recommended TME of whom seven had no histopathologic residual disease. The 1-year and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival was, respectively, 98% (95% CI, 86 to 100) and 90% (95% CI, 58 to 98), and there were no distant recurrences or deaths. Minimal change in quality of life and rectal function scores was observed.

CONCLUSION

Three months of induction chemotherapy may successfully downstage a significant proportion of patients with early-stage rectal cancer, allowing well-tolerated organ-preserving surgery.

Impact of adequate lymph nodes dissection on survival in patients with stage I rectal cancer

Background and Aims

The NCCN guidelines recommended an assessment of ≥ 12 lymph nodes (LN) as an adequate LN dissection (LND) for rectal cancer (RC). However, the impact of adequate LND on survival in stage I RC patients remained unclear. Thus, we aimed to compare the survival between stage I RC patients with adequate and inadequate LND.

Methods

A total of 1,778 stage I RC patients in the SEER database from 2010 to 2017 treated with radical proctectomy were identified. The association between ≥ 12 LND and survival was examined using the multivariate Cox regression and the multivariate competing risk model referenced to &lt; 12 LND.

Results

Stage I RC patients with ≥ 12 LND experienced a significantly lower hazard of cancer-specific death compared with those with &lt; 12 LND in both multivariate Cox regression model (adjusted HR [hazard ratio], 0.44, 95% CI, 0.29-0.66; P &lt; 0.001) and the multivariate competing risk model (adjusted subdistribution HR [SHR], 0.45, 95% CI, 0.30-0.69; P &lt; 0.001). Further, subgroup analyses performed by pT stage. No positive association between ≥ 12 LND and survival was found in pT1N0 RC patients (adjusted HR: 0.62, 95%CI, 0.32-1.19; P = 0.149; adjusted SHR: 0.63, 95%CI, 0.33-1.20; P = 0.158), whereas a positive association between ≥ 12 LND and survival was found in pT2N0 RC patients (adjusted HR: 0.35, 95%CI, 0.21-0.58; P &lt; 0.001; adjusted SHR: 0.36, 95%CI, 0.21-0.62; P &lt; 0.001).

Conclusions

The long-term survival benefit of adequate LND was not found in pT1N0 but in pT2N0 RC patients, which suggested that pT2N0 RC patients should be treated with adequate LND and those with inadequate LND might need additional therapy.

Prognostic Factors and Treatment of Recurrence after Local Excision of Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Indications for local excision in patients with rectal cancer remain controversial. We reviewed factors affecting survival rate and treatment effectiveness in cancer recurrence after local excision among patients with rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 831 patients was enrolled. Of these, 391 patients were diagnosed with primary rectal cancer and underwent local excision. A retrospective observational study was performed on patients who underwent full-thickness local excision for rectal cancer.

RESULTS

The median duration of follow-up was 61 months. The overall recurrence rate was 11.5%. The rate of local recurrence was 5.1%. Five-year overall survival rate among recurrent patients was 66.8%; the rate among patients who underwent salvage operation due to recurrence was 84.7%, compared with 44.2% among patients treated with non-operative management (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis of disease-free survival identified distance from the anal verge (p=0.038) and histologic grade (p=0.047) as factors predicting poor prognosis. Multivariate analysis of overall survival showed that age (p<0.001), serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels (p=0.001), and histologic grade (p=0.013) also affected poor prognosis. In subgroup analysis of patients with recurrence, 25 patients underwent reoperation, while 20 patients did not. For 5-year overall survival rate, there was a significant difference between 84.7% of the reoperation group and 44.2% of the non-operation group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The risk factors affecting overall survival rate after local excision were age 65 years or older, preoperative CEA level 5 or higher, and high histologic grade. In cases of recurrence after local excision of rectal cancer, salvage operation might improve overall survival.

Significant decrease of the pathological stage I rectal carcinoma in the era of neoadjuvant therapy-A matter of concern

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment (nTx) for rectal cancer is commonly reserved for UICC stages II/III. Patients with stage I tumours (T1-2N0M0) are not candidates for nTx. The accuracy of treatment allocation depends on the precision of clinical staging, which is liable to understaging and overstaging. The study aimed at exploring changes in the proportion of stage pI patients with the introduction of nTx over a 26-year period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients with histologically proven rectal cancer excluding carcinoma in situ were retrieved from a prospective database of our colorectal unit. Time periods were defined as per the use of nTx: baseline phase 1994-1997; implementation phase 1998-2005 and guideline phase 2006-2019. Trends over time regarding proportion of applied nTx and stage pI tumours were investigated.

RESULTS

Overall, 1468 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were no major differences in patients' characteristics, especially proportion of synchronous metastases (stage IV) over time. nTx was applied to 1.2% of patients without metastases in the baseline phase, to 29.6% in the implementation phase, and to 59.6% in the guideline phase (p < 0.001). Corresponding proportions for patients with stage pI were 31.0%, 26.3% and 14.2%, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

With a stable proportion of stage IV carcinomas indicating no major changes in the patient cohorts, we could document a significant decrease of stage pI patients with increasing use of nTx. This trend clearly signals overtreatment caused by clinical T- and N-staging. More precise criteria are needed to better select patients with rectal cancer for nTx.

A multi-centre analysis of adjuvant contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) in rectal cancer patients treated with local excision - Preliminary results of the CONTEM1 study

INTRODUCTION

Early rectal cancers are increasingly diagnosed through screening programmes and are often treated using local excision (LE). In the case of adverse pathological features completion total mesorectal excision surgery (TME) is the standard recommendation. The morbidity and mortality risks of TME have stimulated the use of adjunctive treatments following LE to achieve organ preservation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients treated with adjuvant CXB following local excision between 2004 and 2017 in three centres were identified (Clatterbridge, Hull, Nice). All patients had adverse pathological features including: lymphovacular invasion, Sm2-3 Kikuchi level, tumour budding, pT2, positive resection margins (R1). CXB was performed with the Papillon50 ^tm machine to a dose of 40-60 Gy in 2 or 3 fractions over 2-4 weeks preceding/following external beam chemo/radiotherapy. Kaplan Meier survival estimates were used for outcomes measures.

RESULTS

194 patients were identified. Median age was 70 years. pT staging was: pT1:143, pT2:45, pT3:6. CXB alone was given in 24 pts and combined with EBRT in 170. Median follow-up time was 77 months (range 7-122 months). Local relapse rate was 8% and distant metastases 9%. Organ preservation was achieved in 95%. 6 year local recurrence free and overall survival was 91% and 81% respectively. Cancer specific survival was 97%. No treatment related mortality was seen.

CONCLUSION

This large multi-centre cohort study using adjuvant CXB following local excision suggests excellent oncological outcomes for these patients without completion TME. This treatment approach can be considered as an alternative for selective patients compliant with long term follow up.

Lymph Node Positivity in T1/T2 Rectal Cancer: a Word of Caution in an Era of Increased Incidence and Changing Biology for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of lymph nodes in rectal cancer dictates treatment. The goals of this study are to characterize the contemporary rate of lymph node metastasis in early stage rectal cancer and to re-investigate histologic factors that predict positive lymph nodes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, we identified patients with clinical stage I rectal adenocarcinoma. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for lymph node positivity.

RESULTS

12.2% of patients with T1 tumors and 18.0% of patients with T2 tumors had positive lymph nodes. For T1 tumors, positive lymph nodes were present in 9.3% with neither poor differentiation nor lymphovascular invasion (LVI), 17.3% with poor differentiation alone, 34.7% with LVI alone, and 45.0% with both poor differentiation and LVI. For T2 tumors, positive lymph nodes were present in 11.7% with neither poor differentiation nor LVI, 25.3% with poor differentiation alone, 47.3% with LVI alone, and 41.5% with both poor differentiation and LVI. LVI was an independent predictor of positive lymph nodes (OR;4.75,95%CI;3.17-7.11,p < 0.001) for T1 and (OR;6.20,95%CI;4.53-8.51,p < 0.001) T2 tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

T1/T2 tumors have higher rates of positive lymph nodes when poor differentiation and LVI are present. These results should be taken into consideration prior to surgical treatment.

Local excision for T1 rectal tumours: are we getting better?

AIM

The objective was to assess the effect of three different surgical treatments for T1 rectal tumours, radical resection (RR), open local excision (open LE) and laparoscopic local excision (laparoscopic LE), on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

Adults from the National Cancer Database (2008-2016) with a diagnosis of T1 rectal cancer were stratified by treatment type (LE vs RR). We assumed that laparoscopic LE equates to transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The primary outcome was 5-year OS. Subgroup analyses of the LE group stratified by time period [2008-2010 (before TAMIS) vs 2011-2016 (after TAMIS)] and approach (laparoscopic vs open) were performed.

RESULTS

Among 10 053 patients, 6623 (65.88%) underwent LE (74.33% laparoscopic LE vs 25.67% open LE) and 3430 (34.12%) RR. The use of LE increased from 52.69% in 2008 to 69.47% in 2016, whereas RR decreased (P < 0.001). In unadjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in 5-year OS between the LE and RR groups (P = 0.639) and between the two LE time periods (P = 0.509), which was consistent with the adjusted analysis (LE vs RR, hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.92-1.20, P = 0.468; 2008-2010 LE vs 2011-2016 LE, hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.92-1.29, P = 0.321). Laparoscopic LE was associated with improved OS in the unadjusted analysis only (P = 0.006), compared to the open LE group (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.78-1.12, P = 0.495).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the use of a LE approach for T1 rectal tumours as a strategy to reduce surgical morbidity without compromising survival.

Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Local excision (LE) has arisen as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for the treatment of early rectal cancer. Despite a decreased morbidity, there are still concerns about LE outcomes. This systematic-review and meta-analysis design is based on the "PICO" process, aiming to answer to three questions related to LE as primary treatment for early-rectal cancer, the optimal method for LE, and the potential role for completion treatment in high-risk histology tumors and outcomes of salvage surgery. The results revealed that reported overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 71%-91.7% and 80%-94% for LE, in contrast to 92.3%-94.3% and 94.4%-97% for radical surgery. Additional analysis of National Database studies revealed lower OS with LE (HR: 1.26; 95%CI, 1.09-1.45) and DSS (HR: 1.19; 95%CI, 1.01-1.41) after LE. Furthermore, patients receiving LE were significantly more prone develop local recurrence (RR: 3.44, 95%CI, 2.50-4.74). Analysis of available transanal surgical platforms was performed, finding no significant differences among them but reduced local recurrence compared to traditional transanal LE (OR:0.24;95%CI, 0.15-0.4). Finally, we found poor survival outcomes for patients undergoing salvage surgery, favoring completion treatment (chemoradiotherapy or surgery) when high-risk histology is present. In conclusion, LE could be considered adequate provided a full-thickness specimen can be achieved that the patient is informed about risk for potential requirement of completion treatment. Early-rectal cancer cases should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team, and patient's preferences must be considered in the decision-making process.

Surgical and postoperative evaluations of rectal adenomas excised with a rigid proctoscope

PURPOSE

This study presents the surgical and postoperative results achieved with a rigid proctoscope using the transanal endoscopic technique to excise rectal adenomas. The results are compared to the results obtained with other currently employed transanal techniques.

METHODS

We investigated the medical records of patients who underwent transanal endoscopic operations from April 2000 to June 2018 at two tertiary referral centers for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

This study included 99 patients. The mean age was 65.3 ± 13.3 years. The average size of the adenomas was 4.6 ± 2.3 cm, and their average distance to the anal border was 5.6 ± 3.3 cm. The average operative time was 65.3 ± 41.7 min. In 48.5% of the operations, the specimen was fragmented, and in 59.6% of the cases, the microscopic margins were free. The rates of postoperative complications and relapse were 5% and 19%, respectively. The mean follow-up was 80 ± 61.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The described proctoscope proved to be a viable technique with results similar to other techniques, with the advantage that it allowed greater accessibility for surgeons. Therefore, its use could be implemented and become widespread in surgical practice.

The multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved during the past 40 years with the use of a standardized surgical technique for tumour resection: total mesorectal excision. A dramatic reduction in local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes have been achieved as consequences of a better understanding of the surgical oncology of rectal cancer, and the advent of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery have paved the way for a multidisciplinary approach to disease management. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumour regression, extramural venous invasion and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information. Modern treatment strategies are underpinned by accurate high-resolution imaging guiding both neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery, followed by meticulous pathological scrutiny identifying the important prognostic factors for adjuvant chemotherapy. Included in these strategies are organ-sparing approaches and watch-and-wait strategies in selected patients. These pathways rely on the close working of interlinked disciplines within a multidisciplinary team. Such multidisciplinary forums are becoming standard in the treatment of rectal cancer across the UK, Europe and, more recently, the USA. This Review examines the essential components of modern-day management of rectal cancer through a multidisciplinary team approach, providing information that is essential for any practising colorectal surgeon to guide the best patient care.

Primary local excision of stage 1 rectal cancer is not associated with worse oncological outcomes when compared with major resection

PURPOSE

Primary local excision (PLE) for early rectal cancers is associated with decreased surgical morbidity and mortality compared with major resection (MR). However, it is thought to be associated with poorer oncological outcomes. There is a paucity of data regarding PLE within the Australasian population. We present comparative post-operative and survival outcomes for stage 1 rectal cancers treated with PLE or MR from three Western Australian hospitals.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing PLE or MR for stage 1 rectal cancers between February 1996 and May 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 533 patients, 81 underwent PLE. Median post-operative admission was shorter for those undergoing PLE, with no significant difference in post-operative complication rate. Five-year overall survival was greater following MR (89.6% CI 86.1-92.3) compared with PLE (84.6% CI 73.8-91.2; p = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in 5-year cancer-specific survival (MR, 94.4% CI 91.5-96.3; PLE, 95.3% CI 86.0-98.5; p = 0.98) or 5-year disease-free survival (MR, 92.3% CI 89.1-94.7; PLE, 89.1% CI 78.5-94.7; p = 0.36). Local excision provided poorer local tumour control with an inferior 5-year local recurrence rate (MR, 2.16% CI 1.08-4.28; PLE, 10.9% CI 5.30-21.6; p = 0.0002). After controlling for confounders, PLE was significantly associated with worse local recurrence but did not significantly impact overall survival, cancer-specific survival, overall recurrence, or metastatic recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Local excision of early rectal cancer remains a viable alternative, in those unwilling or unable to undergo MR. Patients should be informed that while PLE is associated with poorer local pelvic control, this does not translate to worse survival.

An evaluation of trans-anal rectoscopic-assisted minimally invasive surgery (ARAMIS): a new platform for transanal surgery

PURPOSE

The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new trans-anal rectoscopic-assisted minimally invasive surgery (ARAMIS) platform to treat rectal lesions.

METHODS

ARAMIS was first compared with two transanal minimally invasive surgery platforms (SILS Port and GelPOINT Path) on human cadavers. Surgeons with different experience performed running sutures at different distances, at four quadrants, using the three platforms and gave a score to visibility, safety, and maneuverability. ARAMIS was then utilized on patients affected with rectal neoplasia who met the inclusion criteria. Patients and tumor characteristic and results were prospectively collected. The follow-up examinations included proctoscopy at 3, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

According to surgeons' scores, ARAMIS improves visibility and safety with respect to other platforms for distances beyond 10 cm. The procedure, which lasted an average of 59 min, was successfully carried out in 14 patients. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were reported. The mean tumor size was 3 cm; they were located a mean of 11 cm from the anal verge. Complete removal of the lesion was possible in 13/14 patients. There was one case of adenoma recurrence at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Study results showed that ARAMIS, which is equipped with an adjustable rectoscope, can be considered a safe, effective platform for transanal surgery. The rectoscope protects the rectum during the procedure, a particularly important consideration when proximal rectal lesions are being treated. Further clinical studies are warranted to confirm these encouraging results.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation improves oncologic outcomes in low and mid clinical T3N0 rectal cancers

BACKGROUND

Controversial data exists in the current literature in regard to the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) in patients with clinical T3N0 (cT3N0) rectal cancers, specifically based on location and relation to peritoneal reflection. We aimed to analyze the impact of nCRT on oncologic outcomes among cT3N0 rectal cancers, depending on the tumor height from anal verge (AV).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with cT3N0 rectal cancers was included from a query of a prospectively maintained rectal cancer database from 1980 to 2016. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the tumor height: low (1-5 cm from AV), mid (6-10 cm from AV), and upper (11-15 cm from AV). Patients were stratified by use of nCRT.

MAIN OUTCOMES

5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and local recurrence (LR) using Kaplan-Meier curves.

RESULTS

Five hundred ninety-two patients were included. Overall, 364 (61.4%) patients received nCRT and 228 (38.6%) patients did not. There were 251 (43%) patients with low, 302 (51%) with mid, and 39 (7%) with upper rectal cancer. Patients with low and mid rectal cancers received nCRT more frequently than those with upper rectal cancers (68.5% and 61.2% vs 43.6%, p = 0.007). The 5-year OS was 78% and 63%, DFS-88% and 73%, LR-1% and 8% in nCRT followed by resection vs. surgery alone (p < 0.001). In regard to cancer location after nCRT compared with surgery alone, low and mid cancers had better OS, DFS, and CSS, compared with upper ones.

CONCLUSION

nCRT prolongs survival among patients with rectal cancer below 10 cm from AV; however, it has no effect on 5-year oncologic survival of patients with upper rectal cancer located below peritoneal reflection.

Survival analysis of local excision vs total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer in pT1/pT2 stage and intermediate pathological risk

Background

Local excision (LE) is a feasible treatment approach for rectal cancers in stage pT1 and presents low pathological risk, whereas total mesorectal excision (TME) is a reasonable treatment for more advanced cancers. On the basis of the pathology findings, surgeons may suggest TME for patients receiving LE. This study compared the survival outcomes between LE with/without chemoradiation and TME in mid and low rectal cancer patients in stage pT1/pT2, with highly selective intermediate pathological risk.

Methods

This retrospective study included 134 patients who received TME and 39 patients who underwent LE for the treatment of intermediate risk (pT1 with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, relatively large tumor, or small-sized pT2 tumor) rectal cancer between 1998 and 2016.

Results

Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cumulative recurrence rate (CRR) were similar between the LE (3-year DFS 92%) and TME (3-year DFS 91%) groups. Following subgrouping into an LE with adjuvant therapy group and a TME without adjuvant therapy group, the compared survival outcomes (OS, DFS, and CRR) were found not to be statistically different. The temporary and permanent ostomy rates were higher in the TME group than in the LE group (p < 0.001). Rates of early and late morbidity following surgery were higher in the TME group (p = 0.005), and LE had similar survival compared with TME.

Conclusion

For patients who had mid and low rectal cancer in stage pT1/pT2 and intermediate pathological risk, LE with chemoradiation presents an alternative treatment option for selected patients.

Adjuvant Radiation Survival Benefits in Patients with Stage 1B Rectal Cancer: A Population-based Study from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result Database (1973-2010)

Introduction

Rectal cancer remains a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality in the United States. Currently, total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard therapy for patients with T2N0 (stage IB) rectal cancer. Whether adjuvant radiation therapy provides a survival benefit to these patients or exposes them to unnecessary toxicity remains controversial and unproven to date. This study examined a large cohort of Stage 1B rectal cancer patients who underwent surgical resection and received adjuvant radiation in order to determine the demographic, clinical, and pathologic factors impacting prognosis and survival.

Methods

Demographic and clinical data on 4,054 Stage 1B rectal cancer patients were abstracted from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result (SEER) database (1973-2010). Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS v20.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) using the chi-square test, paired t-test, multivariate analysis, and Kaplan-Meier functions.

Results

Among 4,054 patients with stage IB rectal cancer, 2,364 (58.3%) had surgery only, 1,477 (36.4%) received combination surgery and radiation (CSR), 139 (3.4%) received radiation only, and 74 (1.8%) received no therapy. Most stage IB patients in the surgery only and CSR groups were male (65.8 and 64%) and Caucasian (78.2% and 74.2%), p<0.001. Patients receiving CSR were younger than those undergoing surgery alone (63 vs. 69 years, p<0.001). More tumors in the CSR group were 2-4 cm (53.6%), followed by > 4 cm (24%), while fewer were <cm (22.4%). Histologically, most of the tumors in the CSR group were moderately differentiated (83.5%) and adenocarcinoma NOS (95.5%), followed by poorly (9.3%) and mucinous adenocarcinoma (4.5%), well-differentiated (6.8%), and undifferentiated (0.4%). Overall survival was prolonged in the CSR group compared to the surgery-only group (5.85 years vs. 5.44 years, p<0.001), although cancer-specific survival did not differ (6.33 years vs. 6.42 years, p=0.143). Multivariate analysis identified age>60 (OR 2.4), poorly differentiated (OR 1.7) or undifferentiated grade (OR 2.6), and tumor size >2 cm (OR 1.5) as independently associated with increased mortality in the CSR group (p<0.05) while female gender conferred a survival advantage (OR 0.8), p<0.01.

Conclusions

In the current cohort, CSR was utilized most often in young male Caucasian patients presenting with less advanced disease as compared to other treatment groups. The overall survival is prolonged and overall mortality is lower in patients receiving CSR; however, increased cancer-related mortality with the use of CSR implies that survival benefits may be attributable to favorable non-tumor-related factors such as age, gender, and race. CSR should not replace surgery alone as the standard of care for all Stage IB rectal cancer patients at this time. However, all T2N0 rectal cancer patients should be enrolled in randomized control trials to allow for more defined multimodality management to optimize clinical outcomes for these patients.

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.

Can less be more? Organ preservation strategies in the management of rectal cancer

Background

Total mesorectal excision (tme) is the current standard of care for the treatment of rectal cancer. However, that surgery is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Clinicians and patients are seeking alternatives to radical resection. Currently, prevalent organ-sparing strategies under investigation include local excision and nonoperative management (nom).

Methods

We reviewed the current evidence in the literature to create an overview of the use of transanal endoscopic surgery and watch-and-wait strategies in the modern management of rectal cancer.

Results

Compared with radical resection, transanal endoscopic surgery in patients with early rectal cancer (cT1) having favourable histopathologic features is associated with an increased risk of local recurrence, but no difference in 5-year survival. In patients with T2 or early T3 cancer, strategies that use neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy as adjuncts to local excision are under evaluation. Nonoperative management is a new option for patients who experience a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ncrt). The selection criteria that will appropriately identify patients for whom nom will succeed are not established.

Conclusions

Local excision is appropriate for early rectal cancer with favourable histopathologic features. Although organ-preserving strategies are promising, the quality of the evidence to date is insufficient to replace the current standard care in most patients. Patients should be offered nom in the safe setting of a clinical trial or registry. Rigorous follow-up, including endoscopy and imaging at frequent intervals is recommended when radical resection is forgone.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Does total regression of primary rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy represent "no tumor" status?

Purpose

Insistence that total regression of primary tumor would not represent long-term oncologic outcomes has been raised. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of these patients after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) and radical surgery and to evaluate the associated risk factors.

Methods

We included 189 patients with rectal cancer who showed total regression of the primary tumor after PCRT, followed by radical resection, between 2001 and 2012. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the results were compared with 77 patients with Tis rectal cancer who received only radical resection. Factors associated with RFS were evaluated using Cox regression analysis.

Results

Sphincter-saving resection was performed for 146 patients (77.2%). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 168 patients (88.9%). During the follow-up period, recurrence occurred in 17 patients (9%). The 5-year RFS was 91.3%, which was significantly lower than that of patients with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT (P = 0.005). In univariate analysis, preoperative CEA and histologic differentiation were associated with RFS. However, no factors were found to be associated with RFS.

Conclusion

RFS was lower in patients with total regression of primary rectal cancer after PCRT than in those with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT, and it would not be considered as the same entity with early rectal cancer or "disappeared tumor" status.

Review of Colorectal Studies Using the National Cancer Database

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) is a large clinical oncology database developed with data collected from Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited facilities. The CoC is managed under the American College of Surgeons, and is a multidisciplinary team that maintains standards in cancer care delivery in health care settings. This database has been used in multiple cancer-focused studies and reports on cancer diagnosis, hospital-level, and patient-related demographics. The focus of this review is to explore and discuss the use of NCDB in colorectal surgery research. Furthermore, our aim for this review is to formulate a guide for researchers who are interested in using the NCDB to complete colorectal research.

Evolution of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: From top to bottom

The gold standard for curative treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer involves radical resection with a total mesorectal excision (TME). TME is the most effective treatment strategy to reduce local recurrence and improve survival outcomes regardless of the surgical platform used. However, there are associated morbidities, functional consequences, and quality of life (QoL) issues associated with TME; these risks must be considered during the modern-day multidisciplinary treatment for rectal cancer. This has led to the development of new surgical techniques to improve patient, oncologic, and QoL outcomes. In this work, we review the evolution of TME to the transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) through more traditional minimally invasive platforms. The review the development, safety and feasibility, proposed benefits and risks of the procedure, implementation and education models, and future direction for research and implementation of the TaTME in colorectal surgery. While satisfactory short-term results have been reported, the procedure is in its infancy, and long term outcomes and definitive results from controlled trials are pending. As evidence for safety and feasibility accumulates, structured training programs to standardize teaching, training, and safe expansion will aid the safe spread of the TaTME.

Travel distance influences readmissions in colorectal cancer patients-what the primary operative team needs to know

BACKGROUND

Many colorectal cancer patients receive complex surgical care remotely. We hypothesized that their readmission rates would be adversely affected after accounting for differences in travel distance from primary/index hospital and correlate with mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified 48,481 colorectal cancer patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Travel distance was calculated, using Google Maps, and SAS. Multivariate negative binomial regression was used to identify factors associated with readmission rates. Overall survival was analyzed, using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-day readmissions occurred in 14.9% of the cohort, 27.5% of which were to a nonindex hospital. In the colon and rectal cancer cohorts, readmissions were 14.5% and 16.5%, respectively. Rectal cancer patients had an increase in readmission by 13% (incidence rate ratios [IRR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.21). Factors associated with readmission were male gender, advanced disease, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, hospital volume, Charlson score, and poverty level (P < 0.05). Greater distance traveled increased the likelihood of readmission but did not affect mortality. Travel distance influences readmission rates but not mortality. Discharge readiness to decrease readmissions is essential for colorectal cancer patients discharged from index hospitals.

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

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

Preoperative short-course radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients: results and prognostic factors

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of preoperative short-course radiotherapy for rectal cancer patients.

Methods

The study group comprised 210 patients with pathologically proven resectable rectal cancer. Between 2001 and 2013, they were treated preoperatively with short-course radiotherapy (25 Gy delivered in five fractions), followed by total mesorectal excision. Adjuvant 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy was administered at the discretion of the treating physician, depending on the pathological stage.

Results

After a median follow-up of 57 months, the following 5-year survival rates were observed: overall survival-66.4%, disease-free survival-67.2%, locoregional relapse-free survival-91.7%, and distant metastases-free survival-71.5%. The local failure was observed in 15 patients. Ten patients (4.8%) achieved pathologic complete response. The multivariate analysis demonstrated the regional lymph node involvement to be statistically significant for unfavorable outcomes in terms of all estimated survival rates. Lymphovascular invasion was found to be a strong predictor of survival (HR = 1.68; 95% CI 1.29-3.55) and treatment failure (HR = 1.54; 95% CI 1.08-3.34). The presence of positive surgical circumferential margin was related to six times higher risk of locoregional recurrence. Early and late severe treatment-induced toxicity was reported in 1 and 7.6% patients, respectively.

Conclusions

Preoperative short-course radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision and adjuvant chemotherapy allows to achieve excellent local control and favorable survival rates. The treatment-induced toxicity is acceptable.

Advances in organ preserving strategies in rectal cancer patients

Treatment of rectal cancer patients has been subjected to change over the past thirty years. Total mesorectal excision is considered the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment, but is also associated with significant morbidity resulting in an impaired quality of life. The addition of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to surgery has shown to improve survival and local control and may lead to a partial or even complete response (CR). This raises questions regarding the necessity for subsequent radical surgery. After careful patient selection local excision and wait-and-see approaches are explored, aiming to improve quality of life without compromising oncological outcome. A multimodality diagnostic approach for optimal staging is crucial in determining the appropriate neoadjuvant treatment regimen. Adequate endoscopic restaging of rectal tumours after multimodality treatment will aid in selecting patients who are eligible for an organ preserving approach. The role and accuracy of imaging in the detection of the primary tumour, residual rectal cancer or local recurrence seems vital. Alternative neoadjuvant regimens are currently explored to increase the rate of clinical CRs, which may support organ preserving approaches. This review aims to generate insight into the advances in diagnostics and treatment modalities in all stages of rectal cancer and will highlight future studies that may support further implementation of organ preservation treatment in rectal cancer.

Chemoradiation and Local Excision for T2N0 Rectal Cancer Offers Equivalent Overall Survival Compared to Standard Resection: a National Cancer Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) alone is associated with worse survival compared to radical surgery (RS) for T2 rectal cancer, but LE with additional chemoradiation (CRT) may improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare combined CRT and LE versus RS for T2 rectal cancer.

METHODS

The 2004-2014 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T2N0M0 rectal cancer undergoing LE with neoadjuvant(NA-CRT + LE) or adjuvant(LE + Adj-CRT) CRT, or RS. The main outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards was used to determine the independent effect of treatment on OS.

RESULTS

A total of 4822 patients were included (4367 RS, 242 CRT + LE, 213 LE + Adj-CRT). Mean follow-up was 48.6 (SD28.5) months. There were no differences in patient characteristics, but more high-risk features in the LE + Adj-CRT group. There were no differences in 90-day mortality. Five-year OS was similar (RS 77.4% vs. CRT + LE 76.1% vs. LE + Adj-CRT 79.7%, p = 0.786). Older age, male gender, and higher Charlson score were independently associated with worse OS, whereas treatment type was not. If 90-day mortality was excluded, LE + Adj-CRT was independently associated with worse OS compared to RS.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT with LE for T2N0M0 rectal cancer was not associated with worse OS compared to RS, and may be a viable treatment modality.

Establishing the learning curve of transanal minimally invasive surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an endoscopic operating platform for local excision of rectal neoplasms. However, it may be technically demanding, and its learning curve has yet to be adequately defined. The objective of this study was to determine the number of TAMIS procedures for the local excision of rectal neoplasm required to reach proficiency.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

All TAMIS cases performed from 07/2009 to 12/2016 at a single high-volume tertiary care institution for local excision of benign and malignant rectal neoplasia were identified from a prospective database. A cumulative summation (CUSUM) analysis was performed to determine the number of cases required to reach proficiency. The main proficiency outcome was rate of margin positivity (R1 resection). The acceptable and unacceptable R1 rates were defined as the R1 rate of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM-10%) and traditional transanal excision (TAE-26%), which was obtained from previously published meta-analyses. Comparisons of patient, tumor, and operative characteristics before and after TAMIS proficiency were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 254 TAMIS procedures were included in this study. The overall R1 resection rate was 7%. The indication for TAMIS was malignancy in 57%. CUSUM analysis reported that TAMIS reached an acceptable R1 rate between 14 and 24 cases. Moving average plots also showed that the mean operative times stabilized by proficiency gain. The mean lesion size was larger after proficiency gain (3.0 cm (SD 1.5) vs. 2.3 cm (SD 1.3), p = 0.008). All other patient, tumor, and operative characteristics were similar before and after proficiency gain.

CONCLUSIONS

TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasms is a complex procedure that requires a minimum of 14-24 cases to reach an acceptable R1 resection rate and lower operative duration.

Local Excision of Rectal Cancer

Local excision (LE) of early-stage rectal cancer avoids the morbidity associated with radical surgery but has historically been associated with inferior oncologic outcomes. Newer techniques, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), have been developed to improve the quality of LE and extend the benefits of LE to tumors in the more proximal rectum. This article provides an overview of conventional LE, TEM, and TAMIS techniques, including indications for their use and pertinent literature on their associated outcomes for rectal cancer.

Guideline-concordant Care Improves Overall Survival for Locally Advanced Non-Small-cell Lung Carcinoma Patients: A National Cancer Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Current evidence-based guideline-concordant care (GCC) for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with good performance status is concurrent chemoradiation. In this study we evaluated factors associated with lack of GCC and its effects on overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Unresectable stage III NSCLC patients, diagnosed from 2005 to 2013 with a Charlson-Deyo score of 0, were identified from the National Cancer Database. Primary outcomes were receipt of GCC, defined as concurrent chemoradiation (thoracic radiotherapy, starting within 2 weeks of chemotherapy, to at least 60 Gy), and OS. Multivariable logistic regression modeling identified variables associated with non-GCC. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to examine OS.

RESULTS

Twenty-three percent of patients (n = 10,476) received GCC. Uninsured patients were more likely to receive non-GCC (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; P < .001) compared with privately insured patients. Other groups with greater odds of receiving non-GCC included: patients treated in the western, southern, or northeastern United States (ORs, 1.39, 1.37, and 1.19, respectively; all Ps < .001) compared with the Midwest; adenocarcinoma histology (OR, 1.48; P < .001) compared with squamous cell carcinoma; and women (OR, 1.08; P = .002). Those who received non-GCC had higher death rates compared with those who received GCC (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; P < .001). The uninsured (HR, 1.53; P < .001), patients treated in the western, southern, or northeastern United States (HRs, 1.56, 1.41, and 1.34, respectively; P < .001), adenocarcinomas (HR, 1.39; P < .001), and women (HR, 1.44; P < .001) also all had lower OS for non-GCC versus GCC.

CONCLUSION

Socioeconomic factors, including lack of insurance and geography, are associated with non-GCC. Patient- and disease-specific factors, including increasing adenocarcinoma histology and sex, are also associated with non-GCC. Non-GCC diminishes OS.

National Disparities in Surgical Approach to T1 Rectal Cancer and Impact on Outcomes

This study investigated disparities between patients who had local excision versus radical resection for T1 rectal cancer. A retrospective analysis was performed using the National Cancer Data Base, 2004 to 2011. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients with T1, N0 rectal adenocarcinoma that were <3 cm, well or moderately differentiated without perineural invasion. Patients were stratified based on local excision and radical surgery. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, unplanned readmission rates, and postoperative length of stay. A total of 2235 patients were identified; 1335 (59.7%) underwent local excision and 900 (40.3%) had radical surgery. Overall, radical surgery was associated with an improved 5-year OS rate compared to local excision (0.86 vs 0.78, P = 0.009), increased unplanned readmission (6.5% vs 2.7%, P < 0.001), and longer postoperative length of stay (6.9 days vs 3.1 days, P < 0.001). For patients who had local excision, insurance status was an independent predictor of OS. Compared to patients with private insurance, those with government plans or no insurance had poorer OS (hazard ratio = 1.77 and 17.45, respectively, P = 0.006). Further study is warranted to understand the reasons accounting for this disparity in surgical approach to T1 rectal cancer.

Organ Preservation Using Contact Radiotherapy for Early Rectal Cancer: Outcomes of Patients Treated at a Single Centre in the UK

AIMS

Contact radiotherapy for early rectal cancer uses 50 kV X-rays to treat rectal cancers under direct vision. We present data of a series of patients treated at a single centre with prospective follow-up and functional assessment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients were treated at the Queen's Centre for Oncology, Hull, UK between September 2011 and October 2015. Patients received a biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver/pelvis, computed tomography of the chest and endorectal ultrasound. Patients were deemed to be either unfit for radical surgery or refused it due to the need for a permanent stoma. Follow-up consisted of 3 monthly flexible sigmoidoscopy and MRI of the liver/pelvis and 12 monthly computed tomography of the chest.

RESULTS

In total, 42 patients were treated with contact radiotherapy ± external beam chemo/radiotherapy without any primary surgical excision. The median age was 78 years (range 50-94 years). Local recurrence-free survival was 88%, disease-free survival was 86% and overall survival was 88% with a median follow-up of 24 months (range 5-54 months). The median time to recurrence was 12 months (range 4-14 months). The estimated 30 day surgical mortality for this cohort with radical surgery was 12%. Mortality from the contact radiotherapy procedure was 0%. Functional outcomes as investigated by the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score were good, with 65% having no LARS.

CONCLUSIONS

Contact radiotherapy for early rectal cancer is a safe, well-tolerated outpatient procedure, allowing organ preservation, with excellent oncological and functional outcomes. For elderly co-morbid patients with suitable rectal cancers this should be considered as a standard of care.

Patient-Reported Roles, Preferences, and Expectations Regarding Treatment of Stage I Rectal Cancer in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium

BACKGROUND

Historically, stage I rectal cancer was treated with total mesorectal excision. However, there has been growing use of local excision, with and without adjuvant therapy, to treat these early rectal cancers. Little is known about how patients and providers choose among the various treatment approaches.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify patient roles, preferences, and expectations as they relate to treatment decision making for patients with stage I rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This is a population-based study.

SETTINGS

The study included a geographically diverse population and health-system-based cohort.

PATIENTS

A total of 154 adults with newly diagnosed and surgically treated stage I rectal cancer between 2003 and 2005 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We compared patients by surgical treatment groups, including total mesorectal excision and local excision. Clinical, sociodemographic, and health-system factors were assessed for association with patient decision-making preferences and expectations.

RESULTS

A total of 80% of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision versus 63% of patients who underwent local excision expected that surgery would be curative (p = 0.04). The total mesorectal excision group was less likely to report that radiation would cure their cancer compared with the local excision group (27% vs 63%; p = 0.004). When asked about their preferred role in decision making, 28% of patients who underwent total mesorectal excision preferred patient-controlled decision making compared with 48% of patients who underwent local excision (p = 0.046). However, with regard to the treatment actually received, 38% of the total mesorectal excision group reported making their own surgical decision compared with 25% of the local excision group (p = 0.18).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

The preferred decision-making role for patients did not match the actual decision-making process. Future efforts should focus on bridging the gap between the decision-making process and patient preferences regarding various treatment approaches. This will be particularly important as newer innovative procedures play a more prominent role in the rectal cancer treatment paradigm.

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.

Screening vs. non-screening detected colorectal cancer: Differences in pre-therapeutic work up and treatment

Objectives To compare preoperative staging, multidisciplinary team-assessment, and treatment in patients with screening detected and non-screening detected colorectal cancer. Methods Data on patient and tumour characteristics, staging, multidisciplinary team-assessment and treatment in patients with screening and non-screening detected colorectal cancer from 2008 to 2012 were collected from the Stockholm-Gotland screening register and the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Results The screening group had a higher proportion of stage I disease (41 vs. 15%; p < 0.001), a more complete staging of primary tumour and metastases and were more frequently multidisciplinary team-assessed than the non-screening group ( p < 0.001). In both groups, patients with endoscopically resected cancers were less completely staged and multidisciplinary team-assessed than patients with surgically resected cancers ( p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the screening and non-screening groups in the use of neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer (68 vs.76%), surgical treatment with local excision techniques in stage I rectal cancer (6 vs. 9%) or adjuvant chemotherapy in stages II and III disease (46 vs. 52%). Emergency interventions for colorectal cancer occurred in 4% of screening participants vs. 11% of non-compliers. Conclusions Screening detected cancer patients were staged and multidisciplinary team assessed more extensively than patients with non-screening detected cancers. Staging and multidisciplinary team assessment prior to endoscopic resection was less complete compared with surgical resection. Extensive surgical and (neo)adjuvant treatment was given in stage I disease. Participation in screening reduced the risk of emergency surgery for colorectal cancer.

National Trends in Nonoperative Management of Rectal Adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for stage II/III rectal cancer results in up to 49% of patients with a clinical complete response. As a result, many have questioned whether surgery can be omitted for this group of patients. Currently, there is insufficient evidence for chemoradiation only, or nonoperative management (NOM), to support its adoption. Despite this, anecdotal evidence suggests there is a trend toward increased use of NOM. Our objective was to examine the use of NOM for rectal cancer over time, as well as the patient- and facility-level factors associated with its use.

Methods

We included all incident cases of invasive, nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma reported to the National Cancer Database from 1998 to 2010. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to assess for NOM use over time, as well as associated patient- and facility-level factors.

Results

A total of 146,135 patients met the inclusion criteria: 5,741 had NOM and 140,394 had surgery with or without additional therapy. From 1998 to 2010, NOM doubled, from 2.4% to 5% of all cases annually. Patients who were black (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.57 to 1.86), uninsured (AOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 2.08 to 2.65) or enrolled in Medicaid (AOR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.90 to 2.33), or treated at low-volume facilities (AOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.42 to 1.64) were more likely to receive NOM than were patients who were white, privately insured, and treated at a high-volume facility, respectively.

Conclusion

NOM demonstrates promise for the treatment of rectal cancer; currently, however, the most appropriate strategy is to pursue this approach with well-informed patients in the context of a clinical trial. We observed evidence of increasing NOM use, with this increase occurring more frequently in black and uninsured/Medicaid patients, raising concern that increased NOM use may actually represent increasing disparities in rectal cancer care rather than innovation. Further studies are needed to assess survival differences by treatment strategy.

Predictors for regional lymph node metastasis in T1 rectal cancer: a population-based SEER analysis

BACKGROUND

Local resection of early-stage rectal cancer significantly reduces perioperative morbidity compared with radical resection. Identifying patients at risk of regional lymph node metastasis (LNM) is crucial for long-term survival after local resection.

METHODS

Patients after oncological resection of T1 rectal cancer were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results register 2004-2012. Potential predictors of LNM and its impact on cancer-specific survival were assessed in logistic and Cox regression with and without multivariable adjustment.

RESULTS

In total, 1593 patients with radical resection of T1 rectal cancer and a minimum of 12 retrieved regional lymph nodes were identified. The overall LNM rate was 16.3 % (N = 260). A low risk of LNM was observed for small tumor size (P = 0.002), low tumor grade (P = 0.002) and higher age (P = 0.012) in multivariable analysis. The odds ratio for a tumor size exceeding 1.5 cm was 1.49 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.13], for G2 and G3/G4 carcinomas 1.69 (95 % CI 1.07-2.82) and 2.72 (95 % CI 1.50-5.03), and for 65- to 79-year-old and over 80-year-old patients 0.65 (95 % CI 0.43-0.96) and 0.39 (95 % CI 0.18-0.77), respectively. Five-year cancer-specific survival for patients with LNM was 90.0 % (95 % CI 85.3-95.0 %) and for patients without LNM 97.1 % (95 % CI 95.9-98.2 %, hazard ratio = 3.21, 95 % CI 1.82-5.69, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based analysis, favorable cancer-specific survival rates were observed in nodal-negative and nodal-positive T1 rectal cancer patients after primary radical resection. The predictive value of tumor size, grading and age for LNM should be considered in medical decision making about local resection.

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery: Review of Indications and Outcomes from 75 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an advanced local excision platform that helps overcome technical limitations and morbidity associated with other resection methods. Our goal was to review the indications and outcomes of TAMIS in a large series.

STUDY DESIGN

A review of a prospective database identified patients who underwent TAMIS from 2010 to 2014. Demographic, perioperative, short-term outcomes, and recurrence data were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 75 patients with 76 lesions analyzed. Mean age was 64.0 years (SD 11.6 years) and mean BMI was 27.4 kg/m(2) (SD 4.7 kg/m(2)). Median American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 2 (range 1 to 4). There were 59 benign (77.3%) and 17 malignant (22.7%) lesions: 6 pT0, 6 pT1, 4 pT2, and 1 pT3. Median lesion distance from the anal verge was 10 cm (range 6 to 16 cm). Mean operative time was 76.0 minutes (SD 36.1 minutes). Three patients had intraperitoneal entry; all were closed transanally, but 2 had temporary diverting ileostomies fashioned to ensure healing. Median length of stay was 1 day (range 0 to 6). One patient had a fragmented lesion (1.3%). Five patients had positive margins: 2 in palliative pT2 resections, and 3 in pT1, pT2, and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients. They were managed with radical resection (pT1 and pT2 lesions) and surveillance/medical oncology (GIST). Postoperatively, 3 patients had complications (bleeding, rectal stricture, and recto-vaginal fistula), and all were managed nonoperatively. After median follow-up of 39.5 months (range 10.5 to 65.3 months), 1 pT1 patient with negative margins developed a local recurrence and underwent salvage APR.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal minimally invasive surgery is a viable option for excision of benign or early stage rectal masses, with mid-term oncologic outcomes comparable to those of radical resection. Further, TAMIS minimizes the morbidity and can allow more patients to benefit from the minimally invasive approach.