1
|
Nayak P, Saklani A, Kazi M, Kumar B, D'souza A, Baheti A, Kumar S, Agrawal A, Pansande N, Engineer R. Simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy targeting clinically involved extramesorectal lymph nodes in locally advanced rectal cancer: A retrospective study. Colorectal Dis 2025; 27:e17292. [PMID: 39844646 DOI: 10.1111/codi.17292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2024] [Revised: 07/25/2024] [Accepted: 08/23/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2025]
Abstract
AIM Consensus is lacking regarding the management of extramesorectal lymph nodes (EMLN) in rectal cancer. Using simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SIB-IMRT), we targeted involved EMLN and reserved lateral pelvic lymph nodal dissection (LPLND) for nonresponders. The primary aim of this work was to determine the proportion of patients who avoided LPLND and to establish the pathological EMLN positivity rate. METHOD Consecutive patients with rectal cancer with suspicious EMLN [short axis dimension (SAD) ≥ 7 mm], receiving SIB-IMRT as part of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and subsequently undergoing total mesorectal excision (TME) or watch-and-wait, were included. Our primary objective was to determine the proportion of patients with a good nodal response (EMLN SAD < 5 mm) who were spared LPLND. The 3-year locoregional relapse rate, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were also assessed. RESULTS Of the 61 patients studied, 38 (62.3%) responded well to SIB-IMRT. In this group, 32 patients underwent TME alone and six were observed as per watch-and-wait. The remaining 23 (37.7%) patients with persistent EMLN received TME with LPLND. On pathological evaluation, 7 (30.4%) patients had positive nodes while 16 (69.6%) were negative. At a median follow-up of 32 months (95% CI 23.3-40.7 months), 10 (16.4%) patients developed distant metastases while none had local or pelvic relapse. The resultant 3-year DMFS and OS for the whole cohort were 84.4% and 95.1%, respectively. Overall, 5/61 (8.2%) patients encountered radiation-induced toxicity of grade 3 or above and 8/55 (14.5%) patients had severe postoperative complications. CONCLUSION SIB-IMRT targeting EMLN followed by selective LPLND exhibits excellent oncological outcomes. While patients responding to SIB-IMRT safely avoid LPLND, the potential for increased morbidity in nonresponders must be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Prashant Nayak
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
| | - Avanish Saklani
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Mufaddal Kazi
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Bharath Kumar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
| | - Ashwin D'souza
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Akshay Baheti
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Department of Radiodiagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Suman Kumar
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Department of Radiodiagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Amiya Agrawal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
| | - Namrata Pansande
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
| | - Reena Engineer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, DAE, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Li S, Song M, Tie J, Zhu X, Zhang Y, Wang H, Geng J, Liu Z, Sui X, Teng H, Cai Y, Li Y, Wang W. Outcomes and failure patterns after chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer with positive lateral pelvic lymph nodes: a propensity score-matched analysis. Radiat Oncol 2024; 19:132. [PMID: 39354612 PMCID: PMC11443637 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02529-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2024] [Indexed: 10/03/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to use propensity score matching (PSM) to explore the long-term outcomes and failure patterns in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients with positive versus negative lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with LARC were retrospectively divided into LPLN-positive and LPLN-negative groups. Clinical characteristics were compared between the groups using the chi-square test. PSM was applied to balance these differences. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and local-regional recurrence (LRR) and distant metastasis (DM) rates were compared between the groups using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests. RESULTS A total of 651 LARC patients were included, 160 (24.6%) of whom had positive LPLN and 491 (75.4%) had negative LPLN. Before PSM, the LPLN-positive group had higher rates of lower location (53.1% vs. 43.0%, P = 0.025), T4 stage (37.5% vs. 23.2%, P = 0.002), mesorectal fascia (MRF)-positive (53.9% vs. 35.4%, P < 0.001) and extramural venous invasion (EMVI)-positive (51.2% vs. 27.2%, P < 0.001) disease than the LPLN-negative group. After PSM, there were 114 patients for each group along with the balanced clinical factors, and both groups had comparable surgery, pathologic complete response (pCR), and ypN stage rates. The median follow-up was 45.9 months, 3-year OS (88.3% vs. 92.1%, P = 0.276) and LRR (5.7% vs. 2.8%, P = 0.172) rates were comparable between LPLN-positive and LPLN-negative groups. Meanwhile, despite no statistical difference, 3-year PFS (78.8% vs. 85.9%, P = 0.065) and DM (20.4% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.061) rates slightly differed between the groups. 45 patients were diagnosed with DM, 11 (39.3%) LPLN-positive and 3 (17.6%) LPLN-negative patients were diagnosed with oligometastases (P = 0.109). CONCLUSIONS Our study indicates that for LPLN-positive patients, there is a tendency of worse PFS and DM than LPLN-negative patients, and for this group patients, large samples are needed to further confirm our conclusion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuai Li
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Maxiaowei Song
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Jian Tie
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Xianggao Zhu
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Yangzi Zhang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Hongzhi Wang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Jianhao Geng
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Zhiyan Liu
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Xin Sui
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Huajing Teng
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Yong Cai
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China
| | - Yongheng Li
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
- State Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers, Beijing Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research, Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
| | - Weihu Wang
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, 100142, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sluckin TC, Hazen SMJA, Horsthuis K, Beets-Tan RGH, Antonisse IE, Berbée M, van Bockel LW, Boer AH, Ceha HM, Cnossen JS, Geijsen ED, den Hartogh MD, Hendriksen EM, Intven MPW, Leseman-Hoogenboom MM, Meijnen P, Muller K, Oppedijk V, Rozema T, Rütten H, Spruit PH, Stam TC, Velema LA, Verrijssen ASE, Vos-Westerman J, Tanis PJ, Marijnen CAM, Kusters M. Coverage of Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer Patients with Routine Radiation Therapy Practice and Associated Locoregional Recurrence Rates. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 117:422-433. [PMID: 37120027 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Revised: 04/03/2023] [Accepted: 04/18/2023] [Indexed: 05/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Involved internal iliac and obturator lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) are a known risk factor for the occurrence of ipsilateral local recurrences (LLR) in rectal cancer. This study examined coverage of LLNs with routine radiation therapy practice in the Netherlands and associated LLR rates. METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with a primary tumor ≤8 cm of the anorectal junction, cT3-4 stage, and at least 1 internal iliac or obturator LLN with short axis ≥5 mm who received neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation therapy, were selected from a national, cross-sectional study of patients with rectal cancer treated in the Netherlands in 2016. Magnetic resonance images and radiation therapy treatment plans were reviewed regarding segmented LLNs as gross tumor volume (GTV), location of LLNs within clinical target volume (CTV), and received proportion of the planned radiation therapy dose. RESULTS A total of 223 out of 3057 patients with at least 1 LLN ≥5 mm were selected. Of those, 180 (80.7%) LLNs were inside the CTV, of which 60 (33.3%) were segmented as GTV. Overall, 202 LLNs (90.6%) received ≥95% of the planned dose. Four-year LLR rates were not significantly higher for LLNs situated outside the CTV compared with those inside (4.0% vs 12.5%, P = .092) or when receiving <95% versus ≥95% of the planned radiation therapy dose (7.1% vs 11.3%, P = .843), respectively. Two of 7 patients who received a dose escalation of 60 Gy developed an LLR (4-year LLR rate of 28.6%). CONCLUSIONS This evaluation of routine radiation therapy practice showed that adequate coverage of LLNs was still associated with considerable 4-year LLR rates. Techniques resulting in better local control for patients with involved LLNs need to be explored further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tania C Sluckin
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne-Marije J A Hazen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Imogeen E Antonisse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maaike Berbée
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Anniek H Boer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Heleen M Ceha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Jeltsje S Cnossen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Elisabeth D Geijsen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ellen M Hendriksen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Philip Meijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Muller
- Radiotherapiegroep, Arnhem/Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - Vera Oppedijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Therapy Institute Friesland, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Tom Rozema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute Verbeeten, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Heidi Rütten
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Patty H Spruit
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Northwest Clinics, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - Tanja C Stam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Laura A Velema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - An-Sofie E Verrijssen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Pieter J Tanis
- Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Treatment and Quality of Life, Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|