Comparison of the efficacy of oral capecitabine versus bolus 5-FU in preoperative radiotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer

Real-World Data on the Practice of Chemoradiation with Select Cohort Consolidation Chemotherapy in High-Risk Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers (SOLAR study)

Chemoradiation with capecitabine radiotherapy (Cape–RT) has been the standard of care as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) for more than a decade. However, total neoadjuvant therapy has recently emerged as an alternative with the potential to impact survival outcomes; baseline outcomes with Cape–RT in real-world practice in the Indian context are not well known.

Treatment-naive patients with adenocarcinoma on histology and clinical-radiologically diagnosed LARC who received Cape–RT from June 2014 to December 2021 after multidisciplinary discussion were included. Patients received a long course of conventionally fractionated external beam RT (45–50 Gy in 25#) with concurrent oral capecitabine at a dose of 1650 mg/m2/day. Post approximately 6 to 8 weeks of completion of Cape–RT, patients were evaluated clinically and by magnetic resonance imaging pelvis for total mesorectal excision (TME) in the multidisciplinary team meetings. The primary endpoint of the study was event-free survival (EFS), and the secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and pathological complete response (PCR) rates. EFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method.

A total of 1,189 patients with a median age of 49 years (range: 15–95) were identified and included. A significant proportion of patients had high-risk characteristics, such as T3/T4 disease (94%) and node positivity (90%), and they involved circumferential resection margin (CRM) (51%) at baseline. Signet ring and mucinous histology were seen in 13 and 11% of patients. Two hundred and seventy-six patients (23%) required further consolidation chemotherapy (commonly CAPOX [capecitabine-oxaliplatin] or modified FOLFIRINOX [5-fluorouracil-leucovorin-irinotecan-oxaliplatin]) post-Cape–RT prior to attempting surgery due to either persistent CRM positivity, clinical T4 disease, prostate abutment, sphincter involvement (248 patients, 21%), or extensive bulky disease with poor response (12 patients, 1%). Overall, 14 patients (6%) had an interruption in RT and 22 (8%) in chemotherapy. Post-Cape–RT, with or without chemotherapy, 945 patients (79%) underwent TME. Chemotherapy post-TME was administered in 808 patients (78%). With a median follow-up of 54 months (range: 51.2–57.2), the 3- and 5-year EFS for the entire cohort was 73.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 70.6–75.8) and 64.3% (95% CI: 61.1–67.5), respectively, while the estimated 3- and 5-year OS was 81.3% (95% CI: 78.9–83.7) and 73% (95% CI: 70–76), respectively. On multivariate analysis, the presence of higher T stage (p < 0.001) and signet ring histology (p = 0.004) predicted inferior OS.

Real-world data in a less-resourced setting concurs with published prospective and Western real-world data. This provides confidence in implementing consolidation chemotherapy in total neoadjuvant settings in countries with fewer resources.

Quality of life in a randomized trial comparing two neoadjuvant regimens for locally advanced rectal cancer-INCAGI004

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoCRT) followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), but the emergence of different drug regimens may result in different response rates. Good clinical response translates into greater sphincter preservation, but quality of life (QOL) may be impaired after treatment due to chemoradiotherapy and surgical side effects.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively evaluate the impact of clinical response and surgical resection on QOL in a randomized trial comparing two different neoCRT regimens.

METHODS

Stage II and III rectal cancer patients were randomized to receive neoCRT with either capecitabine (group 1) or 5-Fu and leucovorin (group 2) concomitant to long-course radiotherapy. Clinical downstaging was accessed using MRI 6-8 weeks after treatment. EORTCs QLQ-C30 and CR38 were applied before treatment (T0), after neoCRT (T1), after rectal resection (T2), early after adjuvant chemotherapy (T3), and 1 year after the end of treatment or stoma closure (T4). The Wexner scale was used for fecal incontinence evaluation at T4. A C30SummaryScore (Geisinger and cols.) was calculated to compare QOL results.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were assigned to group 1 and 31 to group 2. Clinical downstaging occurred in 70.0% of group 1 and 53.3% of group 2 (p = 0.288), and sphincter preservation was 83.3% in group 1 and 80.0% in group 2 (p = 0.111). No significant difference in QOL was detected when comparing the two treatment groups after neoCRT using QLQ-C30. However, the CR38 module detected differences in micturition problems (15.3 points), gastrointestinal problems (15.3 points), defecation problems (11.8 points), and sexual satisfaction (13.3 points) favoring the capecitabine group. C30SummaryScore detected significant improvement comparing T0 to T1 and deterioration comparing T1 to T2 (p = 0.025). The mean Wexner scale score was 9.2, and a high score correlated with symptoms of diarrhea and defecation problems at T4.

CONCLUSIONS

QOL was equivalent between groups after neoCRT except for micturition problems, gastrointestinal problems, defecation problems, and sexual satisfaction favoring the capecitabine arm after. The overall QOL using the C30SummaryScore was improved after neoCRT, but decreased following rectal resection, returning to basal levels at late evaluation. Fecal incontinence was high after sphincter preservation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428529.

Comparative effectiveness of treatment modalities in non-metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis of the National Cancer Database

Background

While addition of chemotherapy and radiation to surgery improves the outcomes of non-metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), the best treatment strategy remains controversial.

Methods

To determine the effectiveness of different strategies in patients with curative surgery, we performed an analysis of GAC patients in National Cancer Database. Propensity score method was used to control for imbalances in the confounders. Overall survival (OS), the primary outcome, was analysed using Cox proportional hazard model and Kaplan-Meier curves.

Results

Patients diagnosed with GAC, from 2004 to 2013, were included in this analysis and grouped according to their treatment: surgery alone (15 184), chemoradiation in the neoadjuvant (6000) or adjuvant setting (7953), and perioperative chemotherapy (PCh; 3745) or adjuvant chemotherapy (ACh; 3000). Compared with surgery alone, all adjunctive therapies resulted in an improvement in OS; neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT): HR 0.9 (95% CI: 0.84 to 0.97), PCh: HR 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.79), adjuvant chemoradiation (ACRT): HR 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.75), and ACh: HR 0.86 (95% CI: 0.8 to 0.93). Excluding patients with surgery only, we compared different strategies to PCh. In patients with distal GAC, ACRT resulted in improved OS, (HR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.796 to 0.996), p=0.042. In patients with proximal GAC, NACRT was inferior to PCh, HR 1.101 (95% CI: 1.006 to 1.204), p=0.036.

Conclusion

In this real world population, addition of chemotherapy and radiation to surgery was associated with better OS. Radiation therapy may have a role in patients with distal GAC. Future research can elucidate patient, tumour, and treatment factors that necessitate the inclusion and sequence of radiation therapy in this population.

Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The differences in efficacy between capecitabine and 5-fuorouracil (5-FU) in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) are not well recognized. We performed this meta-analysis to analyze the effect of capecitabine and 5-FU on neoadjuvant CRT to more accurately understand the differences between the 2 drugs.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database were performed to identify all published studies investigating the efficacy of capecitabine in neoadjuvant CRT of LARC versus 5-FU before August, 2017. Primary endpoint was the odds ratio (OR) for improving pathological complete response (pCR) rate of patients with LARC. Secondary endpoints were the ORs of efficiency for downstaging tumor and increasing R0 resection in patients with LARC. Safety analyses were also performed. The OR was the principal measurement of effect, which was calculated as capecitabine group versus 5-FU group, and was presented as a point estimate with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All calculations and statistical tests were performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

In all, 2916 patients with LARC enrolled in the 10 studies were divided into capecitabine group (n = 1451) and 5-FU group (n = 1465). The meta-analysis showed that capecitabine improved pCR (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10-1.63), and R0 resection rate (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.10-3.36). There were no statistically significant differences either in overall downstaging rate (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.79-2.16) or in the tumor downstaging rate (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.79-1.92), but there was a significant difference of the nodal downstaging rate between the 2 groups (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.11-2.54). There was no statistically significant difference in sphincter preservation rate between the 2 groups (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96-1.92). No obvious safety concerns about mortality and complications were raised in these studies. There were no statistically significant differences in 3-year disease-free-survival (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75-2.20), and in grade 3 to 4 acute toxicity during CRT (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.31-1.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with 5-FU-based neoadjuvant CRT, capecitabine-based neoadjuvant CRT can safely improve pCR, nodal down-staging, ad R0 resection of patients with LARC.

Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy with Capecitabine versus Fluorouracil for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis was carried out to compare the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus radiation with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) plus radiotherapy (RT) as neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We searched the Cochrane database, Ovid, Medline, Embase, ISI databases, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database between January 1998 and October 2014. Trials of capecitabine compared with 5-FU plus RT as neoadjuvant treatment for LARC were considered for inclusion. RevMan software was used to analyze these data. Nine trials were included in this meta-analysis, which covered a total of 3141 patients. The meta-analysis showed that capecitabine group had statistically significant better pCR rates (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.10-1.64; P = 0.003), T downstaging rates (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.22-2.06; P = 0.0007), N downstaging rates (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.34-3.16; P = 0.001), less distant metastasis (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.88; P = 0.007), and lowered leucocytes (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.11-0.54; P = 0.0005), but with higher incidence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) (OR, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.59-12.33; P = 0.004). Capecitabine was more efficient than 5-FU in terms of tumor response in neoadjuvant treatment for patients with LARC and favourably low toxicity with the exception of HFS.

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.

Facile synthesis of gold nanorods/hydrogels core/shell nanospheres for pH and near-infrared-light induced release of 5-fluorouracil and chemo-photothermal therapy

We described a facile synthesis of pH and near-infrared (NIR) light dual-sensitive core/shell hybrid nanospheres, consisting of gold nanorods (GNR) as the core and poly(N-isopropylacrylamide-co-methacrylic acid) as the shell, p(NIPAM-MAA). The resultant GNR/p(NIPAM-MAA) nanospheres showed a core/shell structure, with an average diameter of ∼110nm and a strong longitudinal surface plasmon band at NIR region. Due to the photothermal effect of GNR and pH/thermal-sensitive volume transition of p(NIPAM-MAA) hydrogels, the nanospheres with loading of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) by electrostatic interactions were developed as a smart carrier for pH- and photothermal-induced release of 5-FU. Experimental results testified that the cumulative release of 5-FU from nanospheres was markedly increased in a mild acidic medium. Moreover, a NIR light (808nm) irradiation triggered a greater and faster release of 5-FU, which was further testified by relevant results from in vitro cytotoxicity assay, in vivo tumor growth inhibition and histological images of ex vivo tumor sections. These results revealed significant applications of GNR/p(NIPAM-MAA) nanospheres in controlled release of anticancer agents and photothermal ablation therapy of tumor tissues, accompanied by synergistic effect of chem-photothermal therapy.

How can we determine the best neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimen for rectal cancer?

SUMMARY 

The current management of patients with clinically defined ‘locally advanced rectal cancer’ often involves fluoropyrimidine-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision. The focus remains primarily on reducing local recurrence, and improving survival, with organ preservation an increasing target. The best neoadjuvant CRT is the most effective regimen, balanced against the tolerability and late functional consequences, which should be selected for the individual according to their individual risk of local and distant recurrence. Hence, what makes the best neoadjuvant treatment depends on the activity and toxicity of the particular schedule, the aims of treatment, the individual disease characteristics and the individual patient pharmacogenomics. Current research efforts focus on enhancing the efficacy of CRT by integrating additional cytotoxics and biologically targeted agents.

Helical tomotherapy combined with capecitabine in the preoperative treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of helical tomotherapy plus capecitabine as a preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Thirty-six LARC patients receiving preoperative CRT were analyzed. Radiotherapy (RT) consisted of 45 Gy to the regional lymph nodes and simultaneous-integrated boost (SIB) 50.4 Gy to the tumor, 5 days/week for 5 weeks. Chemotherapy consisted of capecitabine 850 mg/m(2), twice daily, during the RT days. Patients underwent surgery 6-8 weeks after completion of CRT. Information was collected for patient characteristics, treatment response, and acute and late toxicities. Grade 3/4 (G3+) toxicities occurred in 11.1% of patients (4/36). Sphincter preservation rate was 85.2% (23/27). Five patients (14.3%) achieved pathological complete response. Tumor, nodal, and ypT0-2N0 downstaging were noted in 60% (21/35), 69.6% (16/23), and 57.1% (20/35). Tumor regression grade 2~4 was achieved in 28 patients (80%). After a median follow-up time of 35 months, the most common G3+ late morbidity was ileus and fistula (5.7%, 2/35). The study showed that capecitabine plus helical tomotherapy with an SIB is feasible in treatment of LARC. The treatment modality can achieve a very encouraging sphincter preservation rate and a favorable ypT0-2N0 downstaging rate without excessive toxicity.

Preoperative chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a comparison of bolus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin and capecitabine

PURPOSE

To compare the acute toxicities, pathologic response, surgical margins, downstaging, local control, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) in locally advanced rectal cancer patients with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) with either concurrent bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) or capecitabine (CA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients who presented to our department with a diagnosis of locally advanced rectal cancer were treated with surgery following preoperative RT with either concurrent 5-FU/LV or CA between January 2008 and December 2011 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Median follow-up period was 38 months (range 3-61). Four patients (6.7%) had grade 3 gastrointestinal (GIS) toxicity during the course of chemoradiotherapy. The pathologic complete response rates were 8% with 5-FU/LV and 8.6% with CA (P = 0.844). Also, 60% of the patients treated with 5-FU/LV and 37.1% with CA had downstaging of the T stage after chemoradiotherapy (P = 0.026). The 5-year local control (P = 0.510), distant control (P = 0.721), DFS (P = 0.08), and OS (P = 0.09) rates were 80%, 80%, 59.4%, and 64.4%, respectively, for patients treated with 5-FU/LV and 85.7%, 82.9%, 74.8%, and 75.1%, respectively, for patients treated with CA.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were seen in the local control and distant recurrences and the survival among patients treated with pre-op RT and concurrent 5-FU/LV compared with those treated with pre-op RT and concurrent CA, except toxicities.

A observational study of the efficacy and safety of capecitabine versus bolus infusional 5-fluorouracil in pre-operative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) combined with bolus infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or oral capecitabine in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-four patients were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-seven patients were treated with 5-FU (350 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus) and leucovorin (20 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus) for 5 days/week during week 1 and 5 of RT. Forty-seven patients were treated with capecitabine (850 mg/m(2), twice daily for 5 days/week). Both groups received the same RT course (45-50.4 Gy/25 fractions, 5 days/week, for 5 weeks). Patients underwent surgery in 6 weeks after completion of the chemoradiotherapy. Data of the observational study were collected.

RESULTS

Grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred in 40.7% (5-FU) and 19.1% (capecitabine) of the patients (P = 0.044). Six patients in the 5-FU group (22.2%) and six patients in the capecitabine group (14%) achieved complete response. Primary tumor (T) downstaging were achieved in 51.9% (5-FU) and 69.8% (capecitabine) of the patients. The pathological ypT0-2 stage was 40.7% (5-FU) and 67.4% (capecitabine) (P = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

In consideration of the better ypT0-2 downstaging rate, less severe toxicities, and no need for indwelling intravenous device on oral capecitabine regimen, the administration of oral capecitabine with RT may be a more favorable option in the neoadjuvant treatment for LARC.

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach is increasingly applied in colorectal surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer has been proved to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncological outcome compared to open surgery, safety and long-term oncological outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remain controversial. Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be efficacious, but indications and limitations are not clearly defined. Therefore, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed this clinical practice guideline.

METHODS

An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel constituted for a consensus development conference in May 2010. Thereafter, the recommendations were presented at the annual congress of the EAES in Geneva in June 2010 in a plenary session. A second consensus process (Delphi process) of the recommendations with the explanatory text was necessary due to the changes after the consensus conference.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal (mid- and low-) rectal cancer is feasible and widely accepted. The laparoscopic approach must offer the same quality of surgical specimen as in open surgery. Short-term outcomes such as bowel function, surgical-site infections, pain and hospital stay are slightly improved with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is not inferior to the open in terms of disease-free survival, overall survival or local recurrence. Laparoscopic pelvic dissection may impair genitourinary and sexual function after rectal resection, like in open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for mid- and low-rectal cancer can be recommended under optimal conditions. Still, most level 1 evidence is for colon cancer surgery rather than rectal cancer. Upcoming results from large randomised trials are awaited to strengthen the evidence for improved short-term results and equal long-term results in comparison with the open approach.

Preoperative oxaliplatin, capecitabine, and external beam radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed, primary operable, cT₃NxM0, low rectal cancer: a phase II study

PURPOSE

In patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), preoperative chemoradiation is known to improve local control, and down-staging of the tumor serves as a surrogate for survival. Intensification of the systemic therapy may lead to higher downstaging rates and, thus, enhance survival. This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of preoperative capecitabine and oxaliplatin in combination with radiotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with LARC of the mid and lower rectum, T₃NxM0 staged by MRI received radiotherapy (total dose 45 Gy) in combination with oral capecitabine (825 mg/m² twice a day on radiotherapy days; weeks 1-4) and oxaliplatin 50 mg/m² intravenously (days 1, 8, 15, and 22). Efficacy was evaluated as rate of tumor down-categorization at the T level.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients were enrolled (19 women, 40 men; median age of 61 years) and all were evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. Down-categorization at the T level was observed in 53% with pathological complete response in 6 patients (10%). Actual total radiotherapy, oxaliplatin and capecitabine doses received were 97%, 90%, and 93% of the protocol-specified preplanned doses, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicity was observed in 15 patients (25%). The most frequent was diarrhea (12%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemoradiation with capecitabine and oxaliplatin is feasible in patients with MRI-proven cT₃ LARC. The only clinically relevant toxicity was diarrhea. Overall, efficacy of the multimodality treatment was good, but not markedly exceeding that of 5-FU- or capecitabine-based chemoradiation approaches.

Capecitabine for locally advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer: A review

Capecitabine (Xeloda^®) is an oral fluoropyrimidine which is produced as a pro-drug of fluorouracil, and shows improved tolerability and intratumor drug concentrations following its tumor-specific conversion to the active drug. We have searched the Pubmed and Cochrane databases from 1980 to 2009 with the purpose of reviewing all available information on Capecitabine, focusing on its clinical effectiveness against colorectal cancer. Special attention has been paid to trials that compared Capecitabine with standard folinic acid (leucovorin, LV)-modulated intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus regimens in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Moreover the efficacy of Capecitabine on metastatic colorectal cancer, either alone or in various combinations with other active drugs such as Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin was also assessed. Finally, neoadjuvant therapy consisting of Capecitabine plus radiation therapy, for locally advanced rectal cancer was analysed. This combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy has a special role in tumor down staging and in sphincter preservation for lower rectal tumors. Comparative trials have shown that Capecitabine is at least equivalent to the standard LV-5-FU combination in relation to progression-free and overall survival whilst showing a better tolerability profile with a much lower incidence of stomatitis. It is now known that Capecitabine can be combined with other active drugs such as Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin. The combination of Oxaliplatin with Capecitabine represents a new standard of care for metastatic colorectal cancer. Combinating the Capecitabine-Oxaliplatin regimen with promising new biological drugs such as Bevacizumab seems to give a realistic prospect of further improvement in time to progression of metastatic disease. Moreover, preoperative chemo-radiation using oral capecitabine is better tolerated than bolus 5-FU and is more effective in the promotion of both down-staging and sphincter preservation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Finally, the outcomes of recently published trials suggest that capecitabine seems to be more cost effective than other standard treatments for the management of patients with colorectal cancer.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a comparison between intravenous 5-fluorouracil and oral capecitabine

INTRODUCTION

Capecitabine provides an attractive alternative to intravenous (IV) 5-flourouracil (5-FU) in chemoradiation regimes for rectal cancer by avoiding the need for intravenous access and inpatient stay. We aimed to compare retrospectively the efficacy of concurrent capecitabine with IV 5-FU in preoperative pelvic chemoradiation schedules for rectal cancer in our centre.

METHOD

Patients treated from January 2005 to June 2007 were included. Information was collected on patient characteristics; treatment details; pathological response to treatment; recurrence and survival. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS V17.

RESULTS

All patients had pelvic radiation. Ninety-nine patients were treated with capecitabine and 97 with 5-FU. The two groups were well matched for age, sex and TNM stage. There were significantly more PS (performance status) 0 patients in the capecitabine group (51%vs 30%) (P = 0.001). Of the 99 patients in the capecitabine group, 91 (92%) were able to undergo surgery with 84 (93%) achieving R0 resection. In the 5-FU group, these proportions were 87 (90%) and 70 (80%). The difference in the rate of R0 resection was statistically significant (P = 0.024). The APR rate was 35% in the capecitabine group compared with 47% in the 5-FU group (P = 0.06). There was no significant difference in pathological complete response (pCR) rates between capecitabine (14%) and 5-FU(12%). A higher pCR rate (30%) was observed in patients who underwent a brachytherapy boost (P = 0.051). There were three local recurrences in the whole patient group, (capecitabine 1; 5-FU 2). Thirty-five patients had distant metastases, 14 in the capecitabine and 21 in the 5-FU group. There was no significant difference in the risk of recurrence between the two groups. Six patients in each group had grade 3 toxicity with diarrhoea being more common with capecitabine.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine for rectal cancer is efficacious and comparable to 5-FU (IV). It is more convenient, is well tolerated and avoids the need for inpatient admission.

Efficacy of the oral fluorouracil pro-drug capecitabine in cancer treatment: a review

Capecitabine (Xeloda) was developed as a pro-drug of fluorouracil (FU), with the aim of improving tolerability and intratumor drug concentrations through its tumorspecific conversion to the active drug. The purpose of this paper is to review the available information on capecitabine, focusing on its clinical effectiveness against various carcinomas. Identification of all eligible English trails was made by searching the PubMed and Cochrane databases from 1980 to 2007. Search terms included capecitabine, Xeloda and cancer treatment. Nowadays, FDA has approved the use of capecitabine as a first line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer when single-agent fluoropyrimidine is preferred. The drug is also approved for use as a single agent in metastatic breast cancer patients who are resistant to both anthracycline and paclitaxel-based regimens or when further anthracycline treatment is contraindicated. It is also approved in combination with docetaxel after failure of prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy. In patients with prostate, pancreatic, renal cell and ovarian carcinomas, capecitabine as a single-agent or in combination with other drugs has also shown benefits. Improved tolerability and comparable efficacy, compared with the intravenous FU/LV combination, in addition to its oral administration, make capecitabine an attractive option for the treatment of several types of carcinomas.

UFT (tegafur-uracil) in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Major achievements in the treatment of localised rectal cancer include the development of total mesorectal excision and the perioperative administration of radiotherapy in combination with continuous infusion (CI) 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). This multimodal approach has resulted in extended survival and lower local relapse rates, with the potential for sphincter-preserving procedures. However, CI 5-FU is inconvenient for patients and is costly. Oral fluoropyrimidines like UFT (tegafur-uracil) offer a number of advantages over 5-FU.

METHODS

We undertook a review of published articles and abstracts relating to clinical studies of UFT in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Pre- and postoperative studies carried out in patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent disease were included.

RESULTS

The combination of UFT and radiotherapy was effective and well tolerated in the preoperative setting, while adjuvant UFT improved survival and reduced distant relapse compared with surgery alone. The efficacy of UFT appears comparable with that of 5-FU and capecitabine and its side-effect profile is favourable.

CONCLUSION

Clinical experience to date suggests that UFT is a valuable treatment option for the perioperative treatment of LARC. Further improvements in patient outcomes may result from the combination of UFT with targeted agents.

Locally advanced rectal cancer: what is the evidence for induction chemoradiation?

The concept of spatial cooperation in neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer is attractive. Chemotherapy may, as a component of CRT, not only act as a radiosensitizing agent but also potentially eradicate distant micrometastases. Recent trials have demonstrated that the addition of concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy to radiation increases the pathological complete response rate, and reduces local recurrence, but as yet, a survival advantage has not been observed.

AIMS

This review aims to examine the evidence for induction CRT in locally advanced rectal cancer. The endpoints of pathological complete response, a negative circumferential margin, sphincter-sparing surgery, local control, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) are examined, as are acute and late morbidity, surgical complications, and late functional results.

METHODS

The information to produce this review was compiled by searching PubMed and MEDLINE for English language articles published until April 2007. The search term included "induction, neoadjuvant, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chemoradiation, combined modality" in association with rectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT in the European randomized trials of rectal cancer improves tumor downstaging, pathological complete response, and local control over radiotherapy alone, but does not translate into a benefit in terms of longer DFS or OS, or a higher chance of sphincter preservation. Metastatic disease remains a significant problem, which provides a strong rationale for the integration of a second cytotoxic drug, or biologically targeted agents.

Capecitabine vs continuous infusion 5-FU in neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer. A retrospective review

BACKGROUND

Standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is concurrent neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation using infusional 5-fluorouracil (CIV-5-FU). Capecitabine (CAP) offers a convenient oral replacement for CIV-5-FU. There is no randomized trial comparing infusional 5-FU to capecitabine. We retrospectively compared the safety and efficacy of CAP-based regimens with well-established CIV-5-FU-based regimens in LARC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected published data on 542 patients treated on either CIV-5-FU (197) or CAP (345) with concurrent radiation (external radiation treatment, XRT) for LARC. This included Phase I or II studies published or available from Pubmed. Safety was assessed by determining proportion of patients who experienced grade III/IV adverse effects. Efficacy was assessed by determining pathological complete response (pCR). Chi-square tests were used to compare the two regimens. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical tests were further corrected for multiplicity using the method of Benjamini and Yekutieli (Ann Stat, 29(4):1165-1188, 2001).

RESULTS

pCR was significantly higher in patients getting CAP vs CIV-5-FU (25 vs 13%; P = 0.008,.P adj = 0.034). Both regimens were generally well tolerated. There was no grade IV toxicity reported. Grade III hand foot syndrome was more common in the CAP group, and grade III diarrhea was more common in the CIV group.

CONCLUSIONS

CAP when compared to CIV seems to have superior efficacy with reasonable toxicities. It is reasonable to treat LARC with CAP + XRT.

A retrospective comparison of concurrent bolus 5-fluorouracil or raltitrexed in preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

5-fluorouracil (FU) is commonly used in preoperative chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer, but not all patients cooperate in taking the 5-day continuous infusion regimen. Raltitrexed (RA), a thymidylate synthase inhibitor, is one of the agents used in place of FU in such cases. We retrospectively compared the toxicity, tumor downstaging, pathologic response and relapse rate with bolus FU or RA during concurrent radiotherapy (RT) to assess the role of RA in place of FU.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of response rates and toxicity data on 59 patients diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer and treated with surgery following preoperative chemoradiation with either concurrent FU or RA between January 1999 and December 2004.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 38 months (range, 1-70). Ten patients (10%) had grade 3 gastrointestinal (GIS) toxicity during chemoradiation. The pathologic complete response rates were 6% with FU and 7% with RA (P = 0.844), while 66.7% of patients treated with FU and 37.1% with RA had downstaging of the T stage after chemoradiation (P = 0.026). The sphincter preservation rates were 45.8% with FU and 51.4% with RA (P = 0.912). The 5-year local control rates were 79.2% for patients treated with RT+FU and 85.76% for patients treated with RT+RA (P = 0.510).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the RT+RA regimen, the incidence of downstaging was greater with RT+FU, but RT+FU was associated with a correspondingly greater rate of acute grade 2 GIS toxicity. However, no significant differences were seen in sphincter preservation, pathologic complete response, local control and distant recurrences rates among patients. FU seems to be the best therapeutic choice, while RA seems to be as effective as bolus FU.

Capecitabine and timing of radiotherapy during preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Capecitabine is effective in treating colorectal cancer and is increasingly being investigated for use in preoperative chemoradiation of rectal cancer. Since capecitabine and its metabolites have a plasma half-life of 0.5-1 hour, the relative timing of capecitabine and radiotherapy may affect clinical outcomes. We retrospectively investigated whether the timing of radiotherapy affects rates of acute toxicity, pathologic response, and relapse in rectal cancer patients receiving capecitabine.

METHODS

Between June 2001 and July 2004, 111 rectal cancer patients were treated with preoperative radiotherapy and concurrent capecitabine given twice daily, in the early morning and at night. Of these, 44 received at least 70% of their radiation treatments before 12 PM (AM group), and 47 received at least 70% of their radiation treatments after 12 PM (PM group).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the AM vs. PM groups in rates of grade >/= 2 acute gastrointestinal toxicity (61% vs. 47%) or skin toxicity (23% vs. 26%) or grades >/= 1 hand-foot syndrome (27% vs. 15%). Although the PM group had numerically higher rates of pathologic complete response (28% vs. 16%) and tumor downstaging (57% vs. 39%), differences in these outcomes and in sphincter preservation were not significant. Rates of 2-year local control, distant control, and disease-free survival were nearly identical in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences were seen in the rates of acute toxicity, pathologic response, and relapse between patients in the AM and PM groups. The timing of radiotherapy does not appear to be critical in patients with rectal cancer receiving concurrent capecitabine.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine versus protracted infusion 5-fluorouracil for rectal cancer: a matched-pair analysis

PURPOSE

To retrospectively compare the acute toxicity, pathologic response, relapse rates, and survival in rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) and either concurrent capecitabine or concurrent protracted infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU).

METHODS

Between June 2001 and February 2004, 89 patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma were treated with preoperative RT and concurrent capecitabine, followed by mesorectal excision. These patients were individually matched by clinical T and N stage (as determined by endoscopic ultrasound and CT scans) with 89 control patients treated with preoperative RT and concurrent protracted infusion 5-FU between September 1997 and August 2002.

RESULTS

In each group, 5 patients (6%) had Grade 3-4 toxicity during chemoradiotherapy. The pathologic complete response rate was 21% with capecitabine and 12% with protracted infusion 5-FU (p = 0.19). Of the 89 patients in the capecitabine group and 89 in the 5-FU group, 46 (52%) and 55 (62%), respectively, had downstaging of the T stage after chemoradiotherapy (p = 0.20). The estimated 3-year local control (p = 0.15), distant control (p = 0.86), and overall survival (p = 0.12) rate was 94.4%, 86.3%, and 89.8% for patients treated with capecitabine and 98.6%, 86.6%, and 96.4% for patients treated with protracted infusion 5-FU, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative concurrent capecitabine and concurrent protracted infusion 5-FU were both well tolerated, with similar, low rates of Grade 3-4 acute toxicity. No significant differences were seen in the pathologic response, local and distant recurrence, or overall survival among patients treated with preoperative RT and concurrent capecitabine compared with those treated with RT and concurrent protracted infusion 5-FU.