Management Of Primary Rectal Cancer Research Articles

Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design

BackgroundAmong patients with rectal cancer, 5–10 % have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10 % recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients ‘care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regarding overall management and criteria for operative intervention. These variations in practice can be explained by structural and organizational differences, as well as cultural dissimilarities. However, surgical resection of PRC-bTME and LRRC provides the best chance of long-term survival after complete resection (R0). With regards to the organization of the healthcare system and the operative criteria for these patients, France and Australia seem to be highly different. A benchmarking-type analysis between French and Australian clinical practice, with regards to the care and management of PRC-bTME and LRRC, would allow understanding of patients’ care and management structures as well as individual and collective mechanisms of operative decision-making in order to ensure equitable practice and improve survival for these patients.Methods/designThe current study is an international Benchmarking trial comparing two cohorts of 120 consecutive patients with non-metastatic PRC-bTME and LRRC. Patients with curative and palliative treatment intent are included. The study design has three main parts: (1) French and Australian cohorts including clinical, radiological and surgical data, quality of life (MOS SF36, FACT-C) and distress level (Distress thermometer) at the inclusion, 6 and 12 months; (2) experimental analyses consisting of a blinded inter-country reading of pelvic MRI to assess operatory decisions; (3) qualitative analyses based on MDT meeting observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups of health professional attendees and conducted by a research psychologist in both countries using the same guides. The primary endpoint will be the clinical resection rate. Secondary end points will be concordance rate between French and Australian operative decisions based on the inter-country reading MRI, post-operative mortality and morbidity rates, oncological outcomes based on resection status and one-year overall and disease-free survival, patients’ quality of life and distress level. Qualitative analysis will compare obstacles and facilitators of operative decision-making between both countries.DiscussionBenchmarking can be defined as a comparison and learning process which will allow, in the context of PRC-bTME and LRRC, to understand and to share the whole process management of these patientsbetween Farnce and Australia.Trial registrationNCT02551471. (date of registration: 09/14/2015)

Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes

The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes

The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

The Impact of 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography on the Staging and Management of Primary Rectal Cancer

18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG PET-CT) has a role in recurrent colorectal cancer. This study was designed to assess the impact of PET-CT on management of primary rectal cancer. Eighty-three patients with rectal cancer underwent PET-CT scan between 2002 and 2005. Referring physicians prospectively recorded stage and management plan after conventional imaging before PET-CT scan, which were compared to subsequent stage and management after PET-CT. Staging PET-CT caused a change in stage from conventional imaging in 26 patients (31 percent). Twelve (14 percent) were upstaged (7 change in N stage; 4 change in M stage; 1 change in N and M stage), and 14 (17 percent) were downstaged (10 change in N stage; 3 change in M stage; 1 change in N and M stage). PET-CT scan altered management intent in seven patients (8 percent) (curative to palliative 6 patients; palliative to curative 1 patient). Management was altered in ten patients (12 percent). There was no difference in impact with respect to tumor height. PET-CT scan impacts the management of patients with primary rectal cancer and influences staging/therapy in a third of patients and should be a component of rectal cancer workup.

PM02 RECURRENT RECTAL CANCER – STRATEGIES FOR PAIN MANAGEMENT

Introduction Despite improvement in management of primary rectal cancer, local recurrence remains a significant problem. The aim was to address strategies for pain management in patients with recurrent rectal cancer.Methods A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane database for studies between 1980 and 2005 assessing pain management of local recurrence of rectal cancer and the evidence was critically evaluated in the light of clinical experience in tertiary colorectal centres.Results Nearly 50% of rectal cancer pelvic recurrences are local and are therefore potentially amenable to curative resection. Preoperative imaging with MRI and PET is essential for appropriate selection of patients for surgery and preoperative adjuvant therapy is important. Five year survival following resection ranges from 18%–58% though morbidity ranges from 21% to 82%. Palliative resection is usually inappropriate. Radiotherapy has an important role in the local control of irresectable local disease. Pain management of advanced pelvic disease, particularly with sacral nerve root invasion, remains difficult and often necessitates a multidisciplinary and multimodality approach. Aggressive surgical treatment favourably affects quality of life and is cost effective for irresectable local disease.Discussion Surgery for local recurrence can result in significant survival with acceptable morbidity and improved quality of life in appropriately selected patients. Pain management of advanced pelvic recurrence is complex and should be multidisciplinary.

Surgery for local recurrence of rectal cancer

Despite improvement in management of primary rectal cancer, 2.6-32% of patients develop local recurrence. A proportion of these patients can be amenable to salvage surgery. The present article reviews the evidence for and against the surgical management for local recurrence of rectal cancer, the role of adjuvant and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), and evaluates short and long-term outcomes. A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane database for studies between 1980 and 2005 assessing surgical management of local recurrence of rectal cancer and the evidence was critically evaluated. Nearly 50% of rectal cancer recurrences are local and are therefore potentially amenable to curative resection. Preoperative imaging is important for appropriate selection of patients for surgery and preoperative adjuvant therapy is essential. Five-year survival following resection ranges from 18% to 58% with 5-year survival following complete resection of over 35% though morbidity ranges from 21% to 82%. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy is beneficial and IORT may have a contributory role in treatment. Aggressive surgical treatment favourably affects quality of life and is cost effective. Surgery for local recurrence can result in significant long-term survival with acceptable morbidity and improved quality of life in appropriately selected patients. Assessment in a specialist centre familiar with these techniques is essential.