Table_1.docx

Abstract

Background: The perioperative treatment model for locally advanced rectosigmoid junction cancer (LARSC) has not been finalized; whether this model should refer to the treatment model for rectal cancer remains controversial. Methods: We screened 10,188 patients with stage II/III rectosigmoid junction adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2004 and 2016 from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Among them, 4,960 did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy, while 5,228 did receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Propensity score matching was used to balance the two groups for confounding factors, and the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used for survival analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to identify independent prognostic factors and build a predictive nomogram of survival for LARSC. X-tile software was used to divide the patients into three groups (low, medium, and high) according to their risk scores. 726 patients in our hospital were included for external validation. Results: LARSC patients did not show a benefit from neoadjuvant radiotherapy (P>0.05). After further excluding patients who received neoadjuvant radiotherapy, multivariate analysis found that age, grade, tumor size, T stage, and log odds of positive lymph nodes were independent prognostic factors for patients without adjuvant chemotherapy and were included in the nomogram. The C-index of the model was 0.690 (95% confidence interval: 0.668–0.712). We divided the patients into low, moderate, and high risk subgroups based on prediction scores of the nomogram. We found that adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve the prognosis of low risk patients, while moderate and high risk patients benefited from adjuvant therapy. External validation data found that moderate, and high risk patients also benefited from AT. Conclusion: Direct surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy may be the best perioperative treatment for LARSC. Moreover, adjuvant chemotherapy is only recommended for moderate and high risk patients as it did not benefit low risk patients.