Management Of Distal Rectal Cancer Research Articles

Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes After High-Dose Chemoradiation Therapy for Nonsurgical Management of Distal Rectal Cancer

Surgery is standard treatment for rectal cancer, but neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) may result in clinical complete response (cCR) in select patients, allowing for nonsurgical management (NSM). Prospective studies of NSM strategies are sparse, however, and long-term data on quality of life (QoL) are limited. We conducted a single-arm phase 2 trial of high-dose CRT for NSM of distal rectal cancer; we report secondary long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs), local regrowth, and overall survival in patients managed nonsurgically. Fifty-one patients with resectable, T2 or T3, N0-N1, low adenocarcinoma received 65 Gy (intensity modulated radiation therapy, brachytherapy boost) and oral tegafur-uracil. Patients with cCR 6 weeks after treatment (clinical examination, magnetic resonance imaging, biopsy) were referred for observation and followed closely with clinical examination, endoscopy, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and PROs for 5 years. Overall colorectal cancer-specific QoL and specific symptom scores were evaluated at baseline and in follow-up and compared between time points. Local regrowth was estimated using cumulative incidence and overall survival using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Forty patients achieved cCR after treatment; 29 were in follow-up at 24 months, 21 at 36 months, and 20 at 60 months. PRO questionnaire completion rates were 90% at 24 months, 100% at 36 months, and 85% at 60 months for patients still in follow-up. Average QoL score did not differ between baseline (median 11.1) and 24 months (13.7), 48 months (11.1), or 60 months (6.9). Only rectal bleeding deteriorated from baseline, with bowel- and bladder-related symptom scores otherwise unchanged in follow-up. At median follow-up of 5.0 years, local regrowth rate and overall survival were 31% (95% confidence interval, 15%-47%) and 85% (95% confidence interval, 75%-97%), respectively. Long-term follow-up after NSM of distal rectal cancer showed excellent general colorectal cancer QoL and local symptom scores. Our study results indicate that high-dose CRT followed by organ preservation might be an alternative to standard treatment.

Long-term outcomes after high-dose chemoradiotherapy for non-surgical management of distal rectal cancer.

3611 Background: Surgery is standard treatment for rectal cancer, but neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) may result in clinical complete response (cCR) in selected patients, allowing for non-surgical management (NSM). Prospective studies of NSM strategies are sparse however, and long-term data on quality of life (QoL) are limited. We conducted a single-arm phase II trial of high-dose CRT for NSM of distal rectal cancer; we report secondary long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs), local regrowth and overall survival (OS) in patients managed non-surgically. Methods: Fifty-one patients with resectable, T2 or T3, N0–N1, low adenocarcinoma received 65Gy (IMRT, brachytherapy boost) and oral tegafur-uracil. Patients with cCR 6 weeks after treatment (clinical examination, MRI, biopsy) were referred for observation, and followed closely with clinical examinations, endoscopies, PET-CTs, and PROs for 5 years. Overall colorectal cancer specific QoL and specific symptom scores were compared between timepoints using paired Wilcoxon tests. Local regrowth was estimated using cumulative incidence; overall survival using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: Forty patients achieved cCR after treatment; 28 were in follow-up at 24m, 21 at 36m, 18 at 60m. Patients left the trial due to local tumor regrowth (n=12), distant metastases (n=3), new primary cancers (n=6) and loss to follow-up (n=1). Average QoL score did not differ between baseline (median 11.1) and 24m (13.7), 48m (11.1,) or 60m (6.9). See Table for individual scores; only rectal bleeding deteriorated from baseline (significantly worse at 24m). At median follow-up of 5.0 years, local regrowth rate and OS were 31% (95 CI 15%-47%) and 85% (95 CI 75%-97%), respectively. Conclusions: Long term follow-up after NSM of early rectal cancer showed excellent general colorectal cancer QoL and local symptom scores. (NCT00952926). EORTC QLQ – CR 29. Proportion reporting ‘quite a bit’ or ‘very much’ on symptom scales. Clinical trial information: NCT00952926. [Table: see text]

PTH-331 Non-operative management of low rectal cancer with complete response to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

<h3>Introduction</h3> 20% of low rectal cancers respond extremely well to standard long course radiotherapy and on clinical examination apparently disappear from the rectal lumen after chemoradiotherapy; an apparent complete response. There are two dilemmas which follow this: Can we be sure about the complete response and that there is no viable residual tumour tissue? If we believe there is no tumour tissue left, how do we then manage these patients? Our Trust started to suggest non-operative management to ‘complete responders’ in January 2007, and the results were remarkable. <h3>Method</h3> Ongoing study looking at 14 complete responders. Surveillance has been MRI/EUS/EUA under GA during years 0–2 every three months. MRI/EUS/EUA under GA during years 3–5 every six months. MRI/EUS/EUA under GA after 5 years every year. A CT scan and colonoscopy were performed at the two and five year marks. These are the Trust’s local guidelines. <h3>Results</h3> 14 patients in total. Seven are still disease-free and still under surveillance. Three had recurrence; two underwent APR and one underwent ultra low anterior resection; all had R0 resections and are still disease-free. Four were suspected to have recurrence but were not fit for major resections therefore had transanal procedures; all had tumour-free specimens and are still disease-free and under surveillance. <h3>Conclusion</h3> There are an important cohort of patients who have low rectal cancer who may not need an operation. We are still unsure exactly how to manage these patients and it is therefore important for each unit to follow them up and share experiences. As a Trust, we will continue to manage these patients with the diagnosis of low rectal cancer, who are ‘disease-free’ following long course chemoradiotherapy, non-operatively. <h3>Disclosure of interest</h3> None Declared. <h3>References</h3> Smith JD, <i>et al</i>. Non-operative management of rectal cancer with complete response to neoadjvant therapy. Ann Surg. 2012;256:965–972 Habr-Gama A, <i>et al</i>. Non-operative management of distal rectal cancer after chemoradiation: experience with the “watch and wait” policy. Dis. Colon Rectum. 2010;52:1137–1143 Habr-Gama A, <i>et al</i>. Operative versus non-operative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):711–718 Tennyson MD, <i>et al</i>. Transanal excision with radiation therapy for rectal cancer. Clin Med Res. 2012;10(4):224–229 Schmoll HJ, <i>et al</i>. ESMO concensus guideline for management of patients with colon and rectal cancer: a personalised approach to clinical decision making. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2479–2516 Deferral of Surgery (Watch And Wait) Study. Royal Marsden Hospital, Pelican Cancer Foundation, Phase II Multicentre Single-Arm Study, Cancer Research Trial Number CRUK/10/006

The use of a lighted stent as a method for identifying the urethra in male patients undergoing transanal total mesorectal excision: a video demonstration.

The application of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for total mesorectal excision (TME) has undergone rapid adoption by expert colorectal surgeons worldwide [1]. It represents one of the most important new techniques for the management of distal rectal cancer [2]. However, the unique approach from below is unfamiliar to rectal cancer surgeons and mandates appropriate training and education. Even with adequate training, there is a risk of urethral injury with TAMIS-TME [3]. This video demonstrates how the male urethra can be injured during transanal TME and then describes a simple method for identifying the urethra. On a cadaveric model, a clear 24 Fr Foley catheter is introduced into the bladder. Through the Foley, a lighted ureteral stent is placed into the Foley and secured in place. Next, transanal TME trainees are instructed to attempt to injure the urethra with the aim of identifying the urethra prior to transection by identifying the lighted stent. Under normal laparoscopic light, the stent was not visible, but when the light source was toggled to OFF, the lighted stent (within the urethra) was clearly visible. In summary, this video demonstrates that the use of a lighted stent within a clear Foley catheter can help visualize the urethra and may prevent inadvertent injury during transanal TME.

Management of distal rectal cancer: results from a national survey

Owing to the complexity of distal rectal cancer its management requires a multidisciplinary approach. The diagnosis and the response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy are not easy to assess and therefore the surgical approach is heterogeneous. The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the experiences of members of the Italian Society of Surgery in diagnosis and treatment strategies for rectal cancer and compare it with international practice. A questionnaire was devised comprising 18 questions with 11 sub-items making a total of 29 questions and submitted online to all the 2,500 members of the SIC starting from July 2010. The survey was completed in June 2011. The overall response rate was 17.8% (444). The majority of the Italian surgeons' responses were in line with the international consensus reflecting the complex management of distal rectal cancer. Other opinions, especially those on staging, diverge from the common view of MRI being the gold standard in the assessment of loco-regional diffusion of the disease and on the superiority of FDG PET-CT versus CT for systemic staging. The timing for the re-staging and for surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy does not reflect the international opinion. Italian surgeons are also exposed to the common difficulties encountered internationally in the management of distal rectal cancer. Probably, the implementation of an Italian rectal cancer registry and of many national and international multicentre studies may improve the management of rectal cancer in Italy.

Peritumoral Inflammatory Infiltrate is not a Prognostic Factor in Distal Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy

BackgroundPeritumoral inflammatory response has been considered a good prognostic factor for colorectal cancer. However, this has not been evaluated in patients submitted to neoadjuvant therapy for distal rectal cancer. For this reason, we decided to study the effect of the presence of this pathological finding on disease recurrence and survival. MethodsThe peritumoral inflammatory infiltrate from recovered pathological specimens of patients operated after neoadjuvant therapy for distal rectal cancer was graded (positive or negative). Patients were compared according to the presence of peritumoral inflammatory response. ResultsOf the 168 patients, 63 (37%) patients had a peritumoral inflammatory response. The lack of peritumoral inflammatory response was significantly associated with the presence of mucinous component (13 vs 3%; p = 0.02). Five-year overall survival (91 vs 81%) and disease-free survival (57 vs 48%) were not significantly different between patients with and without peritumoral inflammatory response (p = 0.5 and 0.3, respectively). ConclusionsPeritumoral inflammatory response is not a favorable prognostic factor in patients with distal rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Possibly, the immunosuppressive action of chemoradiation therapy may lead to a loss of function of the immunological response, which may represent a disadvantage of the neoadjuvant approach for the management of distal rectal cancer.

High-dose preoperative radiation and the challenge of sphincter-preservation surgery for cancer of the distal 2 CM of the rectum

Purpose : Sphincter-preserving surgery for the management of distal rectal cancer is gaining recognition as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection and loss of anal function. The use of high-dose preoperative radiation appears to enhance the options for sphincter preservation, even in the most distal segments of the rectum. Materials and Methods : Seventy patients with tumors located in the distal 2 cm of the rectum received a minimum dose of 40 to 45 Gy over 4 1 4 weeks at 1.8 to 2.5 Gy per fraction. Patients with unfavorable tumors were given an additional boost of 10 to 15 Gy. Surgery was performed 5 to 10 weeks following completion of radiation. Radical surgical resection was performed in 48 patients and full thickness local excision in 22. Follow-up ranged from a minimum of 1 year to a maximum of 10 years, with a median of 4 years. Results : There was one perioperative mortality. Two patients did not have their colostomy closed because of complications. Late diversion was required in 4 patients, primarily for recurrent disease. Sixty patients (86%) maintained long-term satisfactory sphincter function. Local recurrence was observed in 9 patients (13%) and distant metastases in 12 patients (17%). The overall five-year actuarial survival rate was 82%. The 5-year survival and local recurrence for postradiation pathological stage of disease was: T 0, T 1, T 2, N 0−95% and 8%, T 3, T 4, N 0−91% and 4%, T any N +−50% and 41%, respectively. Conclusion : High-dose preoperative radiation, in properly selected patients with rectal cancers of the distal 2 cm, offers opportunities for sphincter-preserving sirgical resection with excellent local control, survival, and enhanced quality of life.

Local excision followed by postoperative radiation therapy

The management of distal rectal cancer is in evolution. Although abdominoperineal resection has been long regarded as the definitive treatment of distal rectal cancer, it is associated with significant morbidity--loss of anorectal function with a permanent colostomy and a high incidence of sexual and genitourinary dysfunction. To overcome these limitations, innovative efforts are underway studying the feasibility and efficacy of a variety of sphincter-preserving operations, usually in combination with radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Local excision procedures with adjuvant therapy represent one such treatment strategy that attempts to optimize local control and survival with preservation of sphincter integrity. This article summarizes the current role of local excision and postoperative irradiation and chemotherapy for patients with carcinoma of the rectum.

Organ preservation in anal and rectal cancers.

For the past 10 to 15 years, radiation therapy and chemotherapy have played an increasingly important role in the treatment of various gastrointestinal malignancies, most prominently in anal and rectal cancer. Critical issues in the care of patients with anal and rectal cancer include not only local control and survival but organ preservation as well. For patients with carcinoma of the anal canal, external-beam irradiation with 5-fluorouracil and chemotherapy with mitomycin C have replaced surgery as primary therapy. Current studies are optimizing this therapy. In contrast, the management of distal rectal cancer is in evolution. Although the abdominoperineal resection has been long regarded as the definitive treatment of distal rectal cancer, it is associated with substantial morbidity (loss of anorectal function with a permanent colostomy and a high incidence of sexual and genitourinary dysfunction). As an alternative, treatment programs utilizing sphincter-preserving procedures with radiation therapy and chemotherapy are under active investigation. In selected patients, these strategies appear promising, and there have been reports of satisfactory local control and survival, as well as preservation of sphincter integrity.

Avoiding Colostomy With Conservative Multimodality Management of Distal Rectal Cancer.

While abdominoperineal resection with permanent colostomy has been the surgical benchmark in the treatment of distal rectal carcinoma, different approaches to treatment have been sought for decades to decrease the morbidity and mortality associated with radical surgical procedures for this disease. The advent of alternative methods of sphincter preservation that afford excellent functional results has led to a decline in the incidence of abdominoperineal resection. With appropriate patient selection, accurate preoperative staging data, and the selection of a surgical approach appropriate to the tumor stage, conservative surgical approaches now can be considered in the treatment of cancer at every level of the rectum.