1
|
Ahmadinejad M, Parvizi A, Sheikhi S, Eghbal F, Navabian S, Chaboki F, Bahri MH, Bozorgmehr R, Bagherpour JZ, Ziaie S. Optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: A retrospective analysis. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2025; 51:109702. [PMID: 40009935 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2025.109702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2024] [Revised: 01/12/2025] [Accepted: 02/12/2025] [Indexed: 02/28/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Determining the optimal interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) and surgery in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) remains crucial for improving treatment outcomes. Extending the interval may increase rates of pathological complete response (pCR), potentially enhancing survival and reducing recurrence. METHODS This retrospective cohort study included 226 patients with LARC who underwent NCRT followed by surgery. ROC analysis was used to establish the optimal interval between NCRT and surgery for achieving pCR, and multivariate logistic regression assessed independent predictors of pCR. Spline regression further analyzed the relationship between surgery timing and the probability of pCR. RESULTS ROC analysis identified 10.5 weeks as the optimal interval, showing increased pCR rates within this period. Multivariate analysis confirmed that surgery interval (OR = 2.603, P = 0.045) significantly predicted pCR. Both ROC and spline regression indicated that a 9-11-week interval maximizes pCR probability. Notably, the comparison of postoperative complications between groups with surgery intervals ≤10 weeks and >10 weeks showed no statistically significant differences (P = 0.518). CONCLUSION An interval of 9-11 weeks between NCRT and surgery optimizes pCR rates without increasing postoperative risks. This timeframe may serve as a favorable window for surgical intervention to enhance outcomes in rectal cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mojtaba Ahmadinejad
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Science, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Arash Parvizi
- Radiation Oncology, Independent Practice, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Saman Sheikhi
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Science, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Fatemeh Eghbal
- Student Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Susan Navabian
- General Practitioner, Independent Practice, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Faranak Chaboki
- Student Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Mohammad Hadi Bahri
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Science, Karaj, Iran.
| | - Ramin Bozorgmehr
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Science, Karaj, Iran.
| | | | - Shirin Ziaie
- Internal Medicine, Independent Practice, Tehran, Iran.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kalady MF, Steele SR. Top Colorectal Articles from 2021 to Inform Your Cancer Practice. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5489-5494. [PMID: 37285092 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13651-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2023] [Accepted: 05/03/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Multimodality treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is the standard of care. Treatments include surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, with medical therapies now being favored in the neoadjuvant setting. Various regimens continue to be studied and defined in prospective randomized trials. The PRODIGE 23 and RAPIDO trials showed improved disease-free survival and pathologic complete response rates for split chemotherapy/radiation treatment and short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy, respectively; both compared with traditional neoadjuvant long course chemoradiation, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Furthermore, new regimens are yielding a higher rate of complete clinical response, allowing for non-operative management. Circulating tumor DNA provides a potential novel option for monitoring response to treatment and rectal cancer surveillance. This manuscript summarizes some of the key clinical trials and studies that are defining clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew F Kalady
- Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
| | - Scott R Steele
- Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Aslanov K, Atici AE, Karaman D, Bozkurtlar E, Yegen ŞC. Optimal waiting period to surgical treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectum cancer: a retrospective observational study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:210. [PMID: 37227524 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-02930-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2023] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal waiting period after neoadjuvant treatment in patients with locally advanced rectal cancers is still controversial. The literature has different results regarding the effect of waiting periods on clinical and oncological outcomes. We aimed to investigate the effects of these different waiting periods on clinical, pathological, and oncological outcomes. METHODS Between January 2014 and December 2018, a total of 139 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma, who were treated in the Department of General Surgery at the Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, were enrolled in the study. The patients were split into three groups according to waiting time for surgery after neoadjuvant treatment: group 1 (n = 51) included patients that have 7 weeks and less (≤ 7 weeks) time interval, group 2 (n = 45) 8 to 10 weeks (8-10 weeks), group 3 (n = 43) 11 weeks and above (11 weeks ≤). Their database records, which were entered prospectively, were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS There were 83 (59.7%) males and 56 (40.3%) females. The median age was 60 years, and there was no statistical difference between the groups regarding age, gender, BMI, ASA score, ECOG performance score, tumor location, and preoperative CEA values. Also, we found no significant differences regarding operation times, intraoperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. According to the Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification, severe early postoperative complications (CD 3 and above) were observed in 9 patients. The complete pathological response (pCR, ypT0N0) was observed in 21 (15.1%) patients. The groups had no significant difference regarding 3-year disease-free and 3-year overall survival (p = 0.3, p = 0.8, respectively). Local recurrence was observed in 12 of 139 (8.6%) patients and distant metastases occurred in 30 of 139 (21.5%) patients during the follow-up period. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of both local recurrence and distant metastasis (p = 0.98, p = 0.43, respectively). CONCLUSION The optimal time for postoperative complications and sphincter-preserving surgery in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer is 8-10 weeks. The different waiting periods do not affect disease-free and overall survival. While long-term waiting time does not make a difference in pathological complete response rates, it negatively affects the TME quality rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khayal Aslanov
- Department of General Surgery, Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Marmara University, 34899, Pendik, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ali Emre Atici
- Department of General Surgery, Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Marmara University, 34899, Pendik, Istanbul, Turkey.
| | - Damlanur Karaman
- Department of Pathology, Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Marmara University, 34899, Pendik, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Emine Bozkurtlar
- Department of Pathology, Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Marmara University, 34899, Pendik, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Şevket Cumhur Yegen
- Department of General Surgery, Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Marmara University, 34899, Pendik, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Liu S, Wang X, Zhuang Y, Bai S, Wu X, Ye Y, Luo H, Yu H, Wang Q, Chang H, Zeng Z, Cai P, Pan Z, Gao Y, Chen G, Xiao W. Total neoadjuvant treatment to increase the clinical complete response rate for distal locally advanced rectal cancer (TESS): A study protocol of a prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Cancer Med 2023. [PMID: 37156624 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 03/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2023] [Indexed: 05/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) was neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT), a new concept, attempts to deliver both systemic chemotherapy and neoadjuvant CRT prior to surgery. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to show higher tumor regression. The objective of this trial was to increase complete clinical rate (cCR) for LARC patients by optimizing tumor response, using TNT regimen as compared to conventional chemoradiotherapy. TESS, a prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study, is underway. METHODS Main inclusion criteria include cT3-4aNany or cT1-4aN+ rectal adenocarcinoma aged 18-70y; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance 0-1; location ≤5 cm from anal verge. Ninety-eight patients will receive 2 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy Capeox (capecitabine + oxaliplatin) before, during, and after radiotherapy 50Gy/25 fractions, before TME (or other treatment decisions, such as Watch and Wait strategy) and adjuvant chemotherapy capecitabine 2 cycles. Primary endpoint is the cCR rate. Secondary endpoints include ratio of sphincter preservation strategy; pathological complete response rate and tumor regression grade distribution; local recurrence or metastasis; disease-free survival; locoregional recurrence-free survival; acute toxicity; surgical complications; long-term anal function; late toxicity; adverse effect, ECOG standard score, and quality of life. Adverse events are graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V5.0. Acute toxicity will be monitored during antitumor treatment, and late toxicity will be monitored for 3 years from the end of the first course of antitumor treatment. DISCUSSION The TESS trial aims to explore a new TNT strategy, which is expected to increase the rate of cCR and sphincter preservation rate. This study will provide new options and evidence for a new sandwich TNT strategy in patients with distal LARC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuang Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - XiaoZhong Wang
- Department of General Surgery, Shantou Central Hospital, Shantou, China
| | - YeZhong Zhuang
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, China
| | - ShouMin Bai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - XiaoJun Wu
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - YiJing Ye
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhongshan People's Hospital, Zhongshan, China
| | - HuiLong Luo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - HaiNa Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - QiaoXuan Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - Hui Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - ZhiFan Zeng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - PeiQiang Cai
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
- Department of Medical Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - ZhiZhong Pan
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - YuanHong Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - Gong Chen
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - WeiWei Xiao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Peng J, Wang W, Jin H, Qin X, Hou J, Yang Z, Shu Z. Develop and validate a radiomics space-time model to predict the pathological complete response in patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer: an artificial intelligence model study based on machine learning. BMC Cancer 2023; 23:365. [PMID: 37085830 PMCID: PMC10120125 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10855-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 04/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In this study, we aimed to investigate the predictive efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiomics features at different time points of neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer in patients with pathological complete response (pCR). Furthermore, we aimed to develop and validate a radiomics space-time model (RSTM) using machine learning for artificial intelligence interventions in predicting pCR in patients. METHODS Clinical and imaging data of 83 rectal cancer patients were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients were classified as pCR and non-pCR patients according to their postoperative pathological results. All patients received one MRI examination before and after neoadjuvant therapy to extract radiomics features, including pre-treatment, post-treatment, and delta features. Delta features were defined by the ratio of the difference between the pre- and the post-treatment features to the pre-treatment feature. After feature dimensionality reduction based on the above three feature types, the RSTM was constructed using machine learning methods, and its performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS The AUC values of the individual basic models constructed by pre-treatment, post-treatment, and delta features were 0.771, 0.681, and 0.871, respectively. Their sensitivity values were 0.727, 0.864, and 0.909, respectively, and their specificity values were 0.803, 0.492, and 0.656, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity values of the combined basic model constructed by combining pre-treatment, post-treatment, and delta features were 0.901, 0.909, and 0.803, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity values of the RSTM constructed using the K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN) classifier on the basis of the combined basic model were 0.944, 0.871, and 0.983, respectively. The Delong test showed that the performance of RSTM was significantly different from that of pre-treatment, post-treatment, and delta models (P < 0.05) but not significantly different from the combined basic model of the three (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The RSTM constructed using the KNN classifier based on the combined features of before and after neoadjuvant therapy and delta features had the best predictive efficacy for pCR of neoadjuvant therapy. It may emerge as a new clinical tool to assist with individualized management of rectal cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaxuan Peng
- Jinzhou medical university, Jinzhou, Liaoning Province, China
| | - Wei Wang
- Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Chongqing, China
| | - Hui Jin
- Bengbu medical college, Bengbu, China
| | - Xue Qin
- Bengbu medical college, Bengbu, China
| | - Jie Hou
- Jinzhou medical university, Jinzhou, Liaoning Province, China
| | - Zhang Yang
- Center for General Practice Medicine, Department of Radiology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Zhenyu Shu
- Center for General Practice Medicine, Department of Radiology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Karthyarth MN, Mathew A, Ramachandra D, Goyal A, Yadav NK, Reddy KMR, Rakesh NR, Kaushal G, Dhar P. Early versus delayed surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Esophagus 2023:10.1007/s10388-023-00989-y. [PMID: 36800076 DOI: 10.1007/s10388-023-00989-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by surgery, is the mainstay of managing locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, the optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is not defined clearly. METHODS A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases was conducted. 6-8 weeks were used as a cut-off to define early and delayed surgery groups. Overall Survival (OS) was the primary outcome, whereas pathological complete resolution (pCR), R0 resection, anastomotic leak, perioperative mortality, pulmonary complications, and major complication (> Clavien-Dindo grade 2) rates were secondary outcomes. Cohort studies and national registry bases studies were analysed separately. Survival data were pooled as Hazard Ratio (HR) and the rest as Odds Ratio (OR). According to heterogeneity, fixed-effect or random-effect models were used. RESULTS Twelve retrospective studies, one RCT, and six registry-based studies (13,600 participants) were included. Pooled analysis of cohort studies showed no difference in OS (HR 1.03, CI 0.91-1.16), pCR (OR 0.98, CI 0.80-1.20), R0 resection (OR 0.90, CI 0.55-I.45), mortality (OR 1.03, CI 0.59-1.77), pulmonary complications (OR 1.26, CI 0.97-1.64) or major complication rates (OR 1.29, CI 0.96-1.73). Delayed surgery led to increased leak (OR 1.48, CI 1.11-1.97). Analysis of registry studies showed that the delayed group had a better pCR rate (OR 1.12, CI 1.01-1.24), with no improvement in survival (HR 1.01, CI 0.92-1.10). Delayed surgery was associated with increased mortality (OR 1.35, CI 1.07-1.69) and major complication rate (OR 1.55, CI 1.20-2.01). Available RCT reported surgical outcomes only. CONCLUSION National registry-based studies' analysis shows that delay in surgery is riskier and leads to higher mortality and major complication rates. Further, well-designed RCTs are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mithun Nariampalli Karthyarth
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India
| | - Anvin Mathew
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.
| | - Deepti Ramachandra
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India
| | - Anuj Goyal
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India
| | - Neeraj Kumar Yadav
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India
| | | | - Nirjhar Raj Rakesh
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India
| | - Gourav Kaushal
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bathinda, Punjab, 151001, India
| | - Puneet Dhar
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Faridabad, Haryana, 121002, India
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Qing S, Gu L, Du T, Yin X, Zhang KJ, Zhang HJ. A Predictive Model to Evaluate Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Adenocarcinoma. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2023; 22:15330338231202893. [PMID: 37750231 PMCID: PMC10521307 DOI: 10.1177/15330338231202893] [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: 10/13/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2023] [Accepted: 09/01/2023] [Indexed: 09/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) before surgery was a standard treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the predictive factors and pathological complete response (pCR) in rectal cancer patients, especially in ultra-low ones. Method: A total of 402 patients were involved in this retrospective study. The logistic regression analyses were used to compare the different subgroups in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine the independent predictive factors of pCR by using a logistic regression model. Results: A total of 402 patients received preoperative CRT. In all patients, multivariate analysis revealed that circumferential tumor extent rate (CER) (≤ 2/3cycle vs >2/3 cycle, P < .001, OR = 4.834, 95% CI: 2.309-10.121), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (both ≤ 5 vs pre > 5 and post ≤ 5 vs both > 5, P = .033, OR = 1.537, 95% CI: 1.035-2.281), and interval time between the end of CRT and surgery (P = .031, OR = 2.412, 95% CI: 1.086-5.358) were predictive factors for pCR. The area under the curve (AUC) of the predictive model was 0.709 (95% CI: 0.649-0.769), which was significantly higher than the CER (0.646, 95% CI: 0.584-0.709), interval time (0.563, 95% CI: 0.495-0.631) and CEA level (0.586, 95% CI: 0.518-0.655). In ultra-low rectal patients, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that CER (≤ 2/3 cycle vs > 2/3 cycle, P = .003, OR = 7.203, 95% CI: 1.934-26.823) and mismatch repair (MMR) status (pMMR vs dMMR, P = .016, OR = 0.173, 95% CI: 0.041-0.720) were predictive factors for pCR. The AUC of the predictive model was 0.653 (95% CI: 0.474-0.832). Conclusion: New predictive models were varied by the histologic types and MMR statuses to evaluate the trend of tumor response to nCRT in all RC cases and ultra-low RC patients, which may be used to individualize stratify for selected LARC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuiwang Qing
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Changhai Hospital of Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Lei Gu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Changhai Hospital of Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Tingting Du
- Department of Special Clinic, Changhai Hospital of Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Xiaolan Yin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Changhai Hospital of Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| | - Ke-jia Zhang
- Clinical Medicine, Medical College of Nantong University, Nantong, China
- Present address: Department of Urology, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
| | - Huo-jun Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Changhai Hospital of Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Akgun E, Caliskan C, Bozbiyik O, Yoldas T, Doganavsargil B, Ozkok S, Kose T, Karabulut B, Elmas N, Ozutemiz O. Effect of interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery on disease recurrence and survival in rectal cancer: long-term results of a randomized clinical trial. BJS Open 2022; 6:6762515. [PMID: 36254732 PMCID: PMC9577542 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2022] [Revised: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal timing of surgery following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is controversial. This trial aimed to assess disease recurrence and survival rates between patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (LARC) who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) after a waiting interval of 8 weeks or less (classic interval; CI) versus more than 8 weeks (long interval; LI) following preoperative CRT. METHODS This was a phase III, single-centre, randomized clinical trial. Patients with LARC situated within 12 cm of the anal verge (T3-T4 or N+ disease) were randomized to undergo TME within or after 8 weeks after CRT. RESULTS Between January 2006 and January 2017, 350 patients were randomized, 175 to each group. As of February 2022, the median follow-up time was 80 (6-174) months. Among the 322 included patients (CI, 159; LI, 163) the cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence at 5 years was 10.1 per cent in the CI group and 6.9 per cent in the LI group (P = 0.143). The cumulative incidence of distant metastasis at 5 years was 30.8 per cent in the CI group and 18.6 per cent in the LI group (sub-HR = 1.78; 95 per cent c.i. 1.14 to 2.78, P = 0.010). The disease-free survival (DFS) in each group was 59.7 and 69.9 per cent respectively (P = 0.157), and overall survival (OS) rates at 5 years were 73.6 versus 77.9 per cent (P = 0.476). CONCLUSION Incidence of distant metastasis decreased with an interval between CRT and surgery exceeding 8 weeks, but this did not impact on DFS or OS. REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03287843 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erhan Akgun
- Correspondence to: Erhan Akgun, Ege Universitesi Tıp Fakültesi Hastanesi, Genel Cerrahi Bornova-Izmir, Turkey (e-mail: )
| | - Cemil Caliskan
- Department of General Surgery, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Osman Bozbiyik
- Department of General Surgery, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Tayfun Yoldas
- Department of General Surgery, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | | | - Serdar Ozkok
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Timur Kose
- Department of Biostatistics, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Bulent Karabulut
- Department of Medical Oncology, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Nevra Elmas
- Department of Radiology, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| | - Omer Ozutemiz
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ege University School of Medicine,Izmir, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Naveed S, Banday SZ, Qari H, Zahoor S, Batoo AJ, Wahid MA, Haq MFU. Impact of the Interval between Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Gastrectomy on Pathological Response and Survival Outcomes for Patients with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-analysis. Euroasian J Hepatogastroenterol 2022; 12:81-91. [PMID: 36959991 PMCID: PMC10028703 DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10018-1382] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Background It is still unknown what is the appropriate time between neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and gastrectomy in cases of gastric cancer. To comprehend the relationship more clearly between waiting time after NACT before having a gastrectomy and survival results, a meta-analysis was done. Methods Retrospective and prospective research from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were thoroughly reviewed. Research examining the impact of delays of 4, 4-6, and above 6 weeks between the conclusion of NACT and surgery in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer qualified as eligible studies. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate served as the main outcome indicator. Additional outcome metrics were overall survival (OS) and survival free of illness. Results The meta-analysis showed that patients with locally advanced gastric cancer with a waiting time for surgery of above 4 weeks compared to those with a waiting time for surgery of below 4 weeks saw a significantly higher pCR rate (pCR) [odds ratio (OR): 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07-2.60; p = 0.02]. The meta-analysis found no appreciable OS differences [hazard ratio (HR): 0.93; 95% CI: 0.76-1.13; p = 0.44). Conclusions Time to surgery (TTS) had no effect on the survival results, according to our data. Only in the group where delaying surgery by more than 4 weeks after the end of NACT improved pathological response, but had no effect on survival. How to cite this article Naveed S, Banday SZ, Qari H, et al. Impact of the Interval between Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Gastrectomy on Pathological Response and Survival Outcomes for Patients with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-analysis. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2022;12(2):81-91.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shah Naveed
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Saquib Zaffar Banday
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Hasina Qari
- Department of Health and Family Welfare, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Sheikh Zahoor
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Azhar Jan Batoo
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Mir Abdul Wahid
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| | - Mohd Fazl Ul Haq
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Deidda S, Elmore U, Rosati R, De Nardi P, Vignali A, Puccetti F, Spolverato G, Capelli G, Zuin M, Muratore A, Danna R, Calabrò M, Guerrieri M, Ortenzi M, Ghiselli R, Scabini S, Aprile A, Pertile D, Sammarco G, Gallo G, Sena G, Coco C, Rizzo G, Pafundi DP, Belluco C, Innocente R, Degiuli M, Reddavid R, Puca L, Delrio P, Rega D, Conti P, Pastorino A, Zorcolo L, Pucciarelli S, Aschele C, Restivo A. Association of Delayed Surgery With Oncologic Long-term Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Not Responding to Preoperative Chemoradiation. JAMA Surg 2021; 156:1141-1149. [PMID: 34586340 PMCID: PMC8482294 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.4566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Extending the interval between the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and surgery may enhance tumor response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. However, data on the association of delaying surgery with long-term outcome in patients who had a minor or poor response are lacking. OBJECTIVE To assess a large series of patients who had minor or no tumor response to CRT and the association of shorter or longer waiting times between CRT and surgery with short- and long-term outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data from 1701 consecutive patients with rectal cancer treated in 12 Italian referral centers were analyzed for colorectal surgery between January 2000 and December 2014. Patients with a minor or null tumor response (ypT stage of 2 to 3 or ypN positive) stage greater than 0 to neoadjuvant CRT were selected for the study. The data were analyzed between March and July 2020. EXPOSURES Patients who had a minor or null tumor response were divided into 2 groups according to the wait time between neoadjuvant therapy end and surgery. Differences in surgical and oncological outcomes between these 2 groups were explored. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes were overall and disease-free survival between the 2 groups. RESULTS Of a total of 1064 patients, 654 (61.5%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 64 (55-71) years. A total of 579 patients (54.4%) had a shorter wait time (8 weeks or less) 485 patients (45.6%) had a longer wait time (greater than 8 weeks). A longer waiting time before surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year overall survival rates (67.6% [95% CI, 63.1%-71.7%] vs 80.3% [95% CI, 76.5%-83.6%] at 5 years; 40.1% [95% CI, 33.5%-46.5%] vs 57.8% [95% CI, 52.1%-63.0%] at 10 years; P < .001). Also, delayed surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year disease-free survival (59.6% [95% CI, 54.9%-63.9%] vs 72.0% [95% CI, 67.9%-75.7%] at 5 years; 36.2% [95% CI, 29.9%-42.4%] vs 53.9% [95% CI, 48.5%-59.1%] at 10 years; P < .001). At multivariate analysis, a longer waiting time was associated with an augmented risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.50-2.26; P < .001) and death/recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.39-2.04; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, a longer interval before surgery after completing neoadjuvant CRT was associated with worse overall and disease-free survival in tumors with a poor pathological response to preoperative CRT. Based on these findings, patients who do not respond well to CRT should be identified early after the end of CRT and undergo surgery without delay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Deidda
- Department of Surgical Science, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Ugo Elmore
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Rosati
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola De Nardi
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Vignali
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Puccetti
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Gaya Spolverato
- Department of Surgical, Oncological, and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padova, Padua, Italy
| | - Giulia Capelli
- Department of Surgical, Oncological, and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padova, Padua, Italy
| | - Matteo Zuin
- Department of Surgical, Oncological, and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padova, Padua, Italy
| | - Andrea Muratore
- Division of General Surgery, E. Agnelli Hospital, Pinerolo, Italy
| | - Riccardo Danna
- Division of General Surgery, E. Agnelli Hospital, Pinerolo, Italy
| | - Marcello Calabrò
- Division of General Surgery, E. Agnelli Hospital, Pinerolo, Italy
| | - Mario Guerrieri
- Department of General Surgery, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Monica Ortenzi
- Department of General Surgery, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Roberto Ghiselli
- Department of General Surgery, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Stefano Scabini
- Oncologic Surgical Unit, Policlinico San Martino Genova, Genoa, Italy
| | - Alessandra Aprile
- Oncologic Surgical Unit, Policlinico San Martino Genova, Genoa, Italy
| | - Davide Pertile
- Oncologic Surgical Unit, Policlinico San Martino Genova, Genoa, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sammarco
- Department of Health Sciences, Operative Unit of General Surgery, University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Gaetano Gallo
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Operative Unit of General Surgery, University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sena
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Operative Unit of General Surgery, University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
| | - Claudio Coco
- Division of General Surgery 2, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Gianluca Rizzo
- Division of General Surgery 2, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Donato Paolo Pafundi
- Division of General Surgery 2, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Claudio Belluco
- Department of Surgical Oncology, CRO Aviano National Cancer Institute IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Roberto Innocente
- Division of Radiotherapy, CRO Aviano National Cancer Institute IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
| | - Maurizio Degiuli
- University of Torino, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Digestive Surgery and Surgical Oncology, San Luigi University Hospital, Orbassano, Torino, Italy
| | - Rossella Reddavid
- University of Torino, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Digestive Surgery and Surgical Oncology, San Luigi University Hospital, Orbassano, Torino, Italy
| | - Lucia Puca
- University of Torino, School of Medicine, Department of Oncology, Digestive Surgery and Surgical Oncology, San Luigi University Hospital, Orbassano, Torino, Italy
| | - Paolo Delrio
- Colorectal Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, IRCCS, G. Pascale Foundation, Napoli, Italy
| | - Daniela Rega
- Colorectal Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, IRCCS, G. Pascale Foundation, Napoli, Italy
| | - Pietro Conti
- Division of General Surgery, Civil Hospital of Lentini, Siracusa, Italy
| | - Alessandro Pastorino
- Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Oncology, Ospedale Sant’Andrea, La Spezia, Italy
| | - Luigi Zorcolo
- Department of Surgical Science, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Salvatore Pucciarelli
- Department of Surgical, Oncological, and Gastroenterological Sciences, University of Padova, Padua, Italy
| | - Carlo Aschele
- Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Oncology, Ospedale Sant’Andrea, La Spezia, Italy
| | - Angelo Restivo
- Department of Surgical Science, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Qwaider YZ, Sell NM, Stafford CE, Kunitake H, Ricciardi R, Bordeianou LG, Goldstone RN, Cauley CE, Berger DL. The time Interval Between the End of Radiotherapy and Surgery Does Not Affect Outcomes in Rectal Cancer. Am Surg 2021:31348211047215. [PMID: 34633256 DOI: 10.1177/00031348211047215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The ideal time interval between the completion of chemoradiotherapy and subsequent surgical resection of advanced stage rectal tumors is highly debated. Our aim is to study the effect of the time interval between the completion of chemoradiotherapy and surgical resection on postoperative and oncologic outcomes in rectal cancer. METHODS Patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resected locally advanced rectal tumors between 2004 and 2015 were included in this analysis. The time interval was calculated from the date of radiation completion to date of surgery. Patients were split into 2 groups based on the time interval (<8 weeks and >8 weeks). Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leak, pathologic complete response (pCR), and readmission) and survival were assessed with multivariable logistic regression and Cox regression models while adjusting for relevant confounders. RESULTS 200 patients (62% male) underwent resection with a median time interval of 8 weeks from completion of radiotherapy. On multivariable logistic regression, there was no significant increase in odds between time interval to surgery and anastomotic leak (aOR = .8 [.27-2.7], P = .8), pCR (aOR = 1.2[.58-2.6] P = .6), or readmission (aOR = 1.02, 95% CI:0.49-2.24, P = .9). Time interval to surgery was not an independent prognostic factor for overall (HR = 1.04 CI = .4-2.65, P = .9) and disease-free survival (HR = 1.2 CI = .5-2.9, P = .6). CONCLUSION The time interval between neoadjuvant radiotherapy completion and surgical resection does not affect anastomotic leak rate, achievement of pCR, or overall and disease-free survival in patients with rectal cancer. Extended periods of time to surgical resection are relatively safe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasmeen Z Qwaider
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Naomi M Sell
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Caitlin E Stafford
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Hiroko Kunitake
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Rocco Ricciardi
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Liliana G Bordeianou
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Robert N Goldstone
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Christy E Cauley
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| | - David L Berger
- Department of General and Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2348Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Liu S, Jiang T, Xiao L, Yang S, Liu Q, Gao Y, Chen G, Xiao W. Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT) versus Standard Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Oncologist 2021; 26:e1555-e1566. [PMID: 33987952 PMCID: PMC8417863 DOI: 10.1002/onco.13824] [Citation(s) in RCA: 118] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2020] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a novel approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), which attempts to deliver both systemic chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery. However, its efficacy and safety remain controversial in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted this meta-analysis to assess such concerns. MATERIALS AND METHODS Head-to-head phase II/III RCTs were searched in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, as well as other sources. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and the R0 resection rate. RESULTS Eight phase II/III RCTs involving 2,196 patients with LARC were assessed. The primary analysis demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the pCR rate for TNT treatment (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-2.45; p = .0005). TNT treatment also showed improvements in DFS and OS outcomes compared with standard chemoradiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96; p = .03 and HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; p = .15). In addition, TNT treatment showed significant efficacy in reducing the risk of distant metastasis (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.95; p = .012). CONCLUSION The overall pCR rate may be improved with TNT compared with standard treatment. The TNT strategy may also improve DFS and OS and reduce the risk of distant metastasis. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is a relatively common disease, with a poor prognosis because of its high metastatic potential. The role of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has always been controversial. This meta-analysis found that TNT in LARC is associated with a significant improvement in overall pathologic complete response rate, disease-free survival, overall survival, and distant metastasis-free survival compared with standard treatment. TNT is a promising strategy for LARC, especially for patients who have little desire for surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuang Liu
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Ting Jiang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Lin Xiao
- Department of Oncology, Section II, Jiangmen Central Hospital, Affiliated Jiangmen Hospital of Sun Yat‐sen UniversityJiangmenPeople's Republic of China
| | - Shanfei Yang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Qing Liu
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Sun Yat‐sen UniversityGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Yuanhong Gao
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Gong Chen
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| | - Weiwei Xiao
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer CenterGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
- Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer MedicineGuangzhouPeople's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Koo K, Ward R, Smith RL, Ruben J, Carne PWG, Elsaleh H. Temporal determinants of tumour response to neoadjuvant rectal radiotherapy. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0254018. [PMID: 34191861 PMCID: PMC8244879 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction In locally advanced rectal cancer, longer delay to surgery after neoadjuvant radiotherapy increases the likelihood of histopathological tumour response. Chronomodulated radiotherapy in rectal cancer has recently been reported as a factor increasing tumour response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients having earlier surgery, with patients receiving a larger proportion of afternoon treatments showing improved response. This paper aims to replicate this work by exploring the impact of these two temporal factors, independently and in combination, on histopathological tumour response in rectal cancer patients. Methods A retrospective review of all patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who received long course (≥24 fractions) neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy at a tertiary referral centre was conducted. Delay to surgery and radiotherapy treatment time were correlated to clinicopathologic characteristics with a particular focus on tumour regression grade. A review of the literature and meta-analysis were also conducted to ascertain the impact of time to surgery from preoperative radiotherapy on tumour regression. Results From a cohort of 367 patients, 197 patients met the inclusion criteria. Complete pathologic response (AJCC regression grade 0) was seen in 46 (23%) patients with a further 44 patients (22%) having at most small groups of residual cells (AJCC regression grade 1). Median time to surgery was 63 days, and no statistically significant difference was seen in tumour regression between patients having early or late surgery. There was a non-significant trend towards a larger proportion of morning treatments in patients with grade 0 or 1 regression (p = 0.077). There was no difference in tumour regression when composite groups of the two temporal variables were analysed. Visualisation of data from 39 reviewed papers (describing 27379 patients) demonstrated a plateau of response to neoadjuvant radiotherapy after approximately 60 days, and a meta-analysis found improved complete pathologic response in patients having later surgery. Conclusions There was no observed benefit of chronomodulated radiotherapy in our cohort of rectal cancer patients. Review of the literature and meta-analysis confirms the benefit of delayed surgery, with a plateau in complete response rates at approximately 60-days between completion of radiotherapy and surgery. In our cohort, time to surgery for the majority of our patients lay along this plateau and this may be a more dominant factor in determining response to neoadjuvant therapy, obscuring any effects of chronomodulation on tumour response. We would recommend surgery be performed between 8 and 11 weeks after completion of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kendrick Koo
- Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rachel Ward
- Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ryan L. Smith
- Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jeremy Ruben
- Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Peter W. G. Carne
- Colorectal Surgery Unit, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Cabrini Monash University Department of Surgery, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Hany Elsaleh
- Radiation Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Development of a novel apoptosis-based tumor regression grade to assess the efficacy of preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a retrospective single-center study. Int J Clin Oncol 2021; 26:1679-1688. [PMID: 34085130 DOI: 10.1007/s10147-021-01948-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is used preferably for locally advanced rectal cancer, followed by a watch-and-wait strategy for cases showing clinical complete response. However, there is a discordance between pathological and clinical complete response rates. We aimed to propose a tumor regression grade (TRG) that truly reflects the therapeutic effects of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS Overall, 293 consecutive patients with T3/T4a/T4b rectal cancer who underwent chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery between Sep 2003 and Dec 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. We assessed apoptosis using M30 cytoDEATH immunostaining and correlated that with conventional TRG (convTRG) evaluated using hematoxylin-eosin staining, and created a new TRG by evaluating apoptosis and convTRG. The modified TRG1-4 (modifTRG) classification was as follows: modifTRG1 comprised poor TRG, modifTRG2 moderate TRG, modifTRG3 good TRG, modifTRG4 complete apoptosis and convTRG3 (pathological complete response). We assessed the overall survival, relapse-free survival, and local recurrence rate. RESULTS Pathological complete response rate was 10.6% when evaluated using conventional staining. Using M30 staining, apoptosis was observed in the residual disease in convTRG 1a 0%, convTRG 1b 0.3%, convTRG 2 9.2%. Combining the two, modifTRG4 was observed in 20.1%. The survival rates were similar between modifTRG4 and convTRG3, suggesting that modifTRG4 was equivalent to pathological complete response. However, in multivariate analysis, modifTRG but not convTRG was an independent risk factor for local and distant recurrences. CONCLUSION The proposed modifTRG truly reflected the therapeutic effects of chemoradiotherapy and may be superior to the convTRG to stratify rectal cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy.
Collapse
|
15
|
Zhang Q, Liang J, Chen J, Mei S, Wang Z. Predictive Factors for Pathologic Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2021; 22:1607-1611. [PMID: 34048192 PMCID: PMC8408379 DOI: 10.31557/apjcp.2021.22.5.1607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: An accurate assessment of potential pathologic complete response(pCR) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy(NCRT) is important for the appropriate treatment of rectal cancer. However, the factors that predict the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have not been well defined. Therefore, this study analyzed the predictive factors on the development of pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Methods: From January 2008 to January 2018, a total of 432 consecutive patients from a single institution patients who underwent a long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were reviewed in this study. The clinicopathological features were analyzed to identify predictive factors for pathologic complete response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Results: The rate of pathologic complete response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation was 20.8%, patients were divided into the pCR and non-pCR groups. The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, gender, body mass index, ASA score, tumor stage, tumor differentiation, tumor location, surgical procedure, chemotherapy regimen and radiation dose. The multivariate analysis revealed that a pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level of ≤5 ng/mL and an interval of ≥8 weeks between the completion of chemoradiation and surgical resection were independent risk factors of an increased rate of pCR. Conclusions: Pretreatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level of ≤5 ng/mL and an interval of ≥8 weeks between the completion of chemoradiation and surgical resection are predictive factors for pathologic complete response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Using these predictive factors, we can predict the prognosis of patients and develop adaptive treatment strategies. A wait-and-see policy might be possible in highly selective cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qi Zhang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
| | - Jianwei Liang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
| | - Jianan Chen
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
| | - Shiwen Mei
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
| | - Zheng Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, China
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Wang X, Zheng Z, Zhu H, Yu Q, Huang S, Lu X, Huang Y, Chi P. Timing to achieve the best recurrence-free survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: experience in a large-volume center in China. Int J Colorectal Dis 2021; 36:1007-1016. [PMID: 33398511 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03829-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/25/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
AIM To identify the optimal interval from the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to surgery (CRT-surgery interval) based on long-term oncological outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS Retrospective data analysis is reported from patients diagnosed with cT3 or T4 or TxN+ rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant treatment and curative-intent surgery between January 2010 and December 2018. With a priority focus on the effect of interval on oncological prognosis, we used recurrence-free survival (RFS) as the primary endpoint to determine the best cutoff point of time intervals. Then, the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients from longer and shorter interval groups were compared. RESULTS Data from 910 patients were analyzed, with 185 patients who achieved pCR (20.3%). The trend for increased rates of pCR for groups with a prolonged time interval was not observed (P = 0.808). X-tile determined a cutoff value of 10.5 weeks, and the population was divided into longer (> 10 weeks) and shorter (≤ 10 weeks) interval groups. The shorter interval was associated with a higher wound infection rate (4.7% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.031), but other postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. The 5-year RFS rate was significantly higher in patients in a longer group than those in the shorter weeks group (86.8% vs. 77.8%, P = 0.016). The 5-year OS rates between groups were similar (84.1% vs. 82.5%, P = 0.257). Local recurrence and lung metastases rates were higher in shorter interval group than those of longer group (local recurrence rate: 1.7% vs. 5.1%, P = 0.049; lung metastases rate: 5.7% vs. 10.7%, P = 0.047). Cox multivariate regression analysis confirmed the CRT-surgery interval (HR = 0.599, P = 0.045) to be an independent prognostic factor of RFS. CONCLUSION This study is the first, to the best of our knowledge, to define the optimal CRT-surgery interval based on RFS as the primary endpoint. Prolonging the waiting period to 10 weeks after the completion of CRT with additional chemotherapy cycles during the interval period might be a promising option to improve oncological survival in LARC patients treated with CRT and TME without compromising the surgical safety. Further randomized controlled trials investigating this are warranted to prove a clearly causality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaojie Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhifang Zheng
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China
| | - Heyuan Zhu
- Basic Medical College, Changsha Medical College, Changsha, China
| | - Qian Yu
- Department of Pathology, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Shenghui Huang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China
| | - Xingrong Lu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China
| | - Ying Huang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China.
| | - Pan Chi
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 29 Xin-Quan Road, Fuzhou, Fujian, 350001, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Ao S, Wang Y, Song Q, Ye Y, Lyu G. Current status and future perspectives on neoadjuvant therapy in gastric cancer. Chin J Cancer Res 2021; 33:181-192. [PMID: 34158738 PMCID: PMC8181872 DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2021.02.06] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Gastric cancer, with high morbidity and mortality rates, is one of the most heterogeneous tumors. Radical gastrectomy and postoperative chemotherapy are the standard treatments. However, the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) need to be confirmed by many trials before implementation, creating a bottleneck in development. Although clinical benefits of NAT have been observed, a series of problems remain to be solved. Before therapy, more contributing factors should be offered for choice in the intended population and ideal regimens. Enhanced computed tomography (CT) scanning is usually applied to evaluate effectiveness according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), yet CT scanning results sometimes differ from pathological responses. After NAT, the appropriate time for surgery is still empirically defined. Our review aims to discuss the abovementioned issues regarding NAT for GC, including indications, selection of regimens, lesion assessment and NAT-surgery interval time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sheng Ao
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China
| | - Yuchen Wang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
| | - Qingzhi Song
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
| | - Yingjiang Ye
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China
| | - Guoqing Lyu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Bausys A, Ümarik T, Luksta M, Reinsoo A, Rackauskas R, Anglickiene G, Kryzauskas M, Tõnismäe K, Senina V, Seinin D, Bausys R, Strupas K. Impact of the Interval Between Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Gastrectomy on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2021; 28:4444-4455. [PMID: 33417120 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09507-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 12/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal time between neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC) remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the association between the time-to-surgery (TTS) interval and the major pathologic response (mPR). METHODS In this study, 280 consecutive GC patients who underwent NAC followed by gastrectomy between 2014 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed by the use of prospectively collected databases from three major GC treatment centers in Lithuania and Estonia. Based on TTS, they were grouped into three interval categories: the early-surgery group (ESG: ≤ 30 days; n = 70), the standard-surgery group (SSG: 31-43 days; n = 138), and the delayed-surgery group (DSG: ≥ 44 days, n = 72). The primary outcome of the study was the mPR rate. The secondary end points were postoperative morbidity, mortality, oncologic safety (measured as the number of resected lymph nodes and radicality), and long-term outcomes. RESULTS The mPR rate for the ESG group (32.9%) was significantly higher than for the SSG group (20.3%) or the DSG group (16.7%) (p = 0.047). Furthermore, after adjustment for patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics, the odds for achievement of mPR were twofold higher for the patients undergoing early surgery (odds ratio [OR] 2.09; 95% conflidence interval [CI] 1.01-4.34; p = 0.047). Overall morbidity, severe complications, 30-day mortality, R0 resection, and retrieval of at least 15 lymph nodes rates were similar across the study groups. In addition, the long-term outcomes did not differ between the study groups. CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that an interval of more than 30 days between the end of NAC and gastrectomy is associated with a higher mPR rate, the same oncologic safety of surgery, and similar morbidity and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Augustinas Bausys
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania. .,Department of Abdominal Surgery and Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania.
| | - Toomas Ümarik
- Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Surgery Department, North Estonia Medical Centre, Tallinn, Estonia
| | - Martynas Luksta
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Arvo Reinsoo
- Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Surgery Department, North Estonia Medical Centre, Tallinn, Estonia
| | - Rokas Rackauskas
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Giedre Anglickiene
- Department of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Marius Kryzauskas
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Kristina Tõnismäe
- Pathology Department, North Estonia Medical Centre, Tallinn, Estonia
| | - Veslava Senina
- National Centre of Pathology, Affiliate of Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Dmitrij Seinin
- National Centre of Pathology, Affiliate of Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Rimantas Bausys
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.,Department of Abdominal Surgery and Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Kestutis Strupas
- Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology, and Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gambacorta MA, Masciocchi C, Chiloiro G, Meldolesi E, Macchia G, van Soest J, Peters F, Collette L, Gérard JP, Ngan S, Rödel CC, Damiani A, Dekker A, Valentini V. Timing to achieve the highest rate of pCR after preoperative radiochemotherapy in rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of 3085 patients from 7 randomized trials. Radiother Oncol 2021; 154:154-160. [PMID: 32966845 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.09.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2019] [Revised: 09/01/2020] [Accepted: 09/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Optimal timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (Nad-CRT) is still controversial in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The primary goal of this study was to determine the best surgical interval (SI) to achieve the highest rate of pathological complete response (pCR) and secondly to evaluate the effect on survival outcomes according to the SI. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients data were extracted from the international randomized trials: Accord12/0405, EORTC22921, FFCD9203, CAO/ARO/AIO-94, CAO-ARO-AIO-04, INTERACT and TROG01.04. Inclusion criteria were: age≥ 18, cT3-T4 and cN0-2, no clinical evidence of distant metastasis at diagnosis, Nad-CRT followed by surgery. Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction for categorical variables, the Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables, Mann-Kendall test, Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test, univariate and multivariate logistic regression model was used for data analysis. RESULTS 3085 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the pCR rate was 14% at a median SI of 6 weeks (range 1-31). The cumulative pCR rate increased significantly when SI lengthened, with 95% of pCR events within 10 weeks from Nad-CRT. At univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, lengthening of SI (p< 0.01), radiotherapy dose (p< 0.01), and the addition of oxaliplatin to Nad-CRT (p< 0.01) had a favorable impact on pCR. Furthermore, lengthening of SI was not impact on local recurrences, distance metastases, and overall survival. CONCLUSION This pooled analysis suggests that the best time to achieve pCR in LARC is at 10 weeks, considering that the lengthening of SI is not detrimental concerning survival outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Antonietta Gambacorta
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy; Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore - Roma, Italy
| | - Carlotta Masciocchi
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy
| | - Giuditta Chiloiro
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy; Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore - Roma, Italy.
| | - Elisa Meldolesi
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy
| | | | - Johan van Soest
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Medical Centre+, The Netherlands
| | - Fenke Peters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jean-Pierre Gérard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice Côte-d'Azur University, France
| | - Samuel Ngan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - C Claus Rödel
- Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University, Germany
| | - Andrea Damiani
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy
| | - Andre Dekker
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Medical Centre+, The Netherlands
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS - Roma, Italy; Istituto di Radiologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore - Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Mei SW, Liu Z, Wei FZ, Chen JN, Wang ZJ, Shen HY, Li J, Zhao FQ, Pei W, Wang Z, Wang XS, Liu Q. Impact of interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in rectal cancer patients. World J Gastroenterol 2020; 26:4624-4638. [PMID: 32884221 PMCID: PMC7445870 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i31.4624] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2020] [Revised: 06/07/2020] [Accepted: 08/01/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Epidemiologically, in China, locally advanced rectal cancer is a more common form of rectal cancer. Preoperative neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy can effectively reduce the size of locally invasive tumors and improve disease-free survival (DFS) and pathologic response after surgery. At present, this modality has become the standard protocol for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer in many centers, but the optimal time for surgery after neoadjuvant therapy is still controversial. AIM To investigate the impact of time interval between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery on DFS and pathologic response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS A total of 231 patients who were classified as having clinical stage II or III advanced rectal cancer and underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery at the National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College from November 2014 to August 2017 were involved in this retrospective cohort study. The patients were divided into two groups based on the different time intervals between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery: 139 (60.2%) patients were in group A (≤ 9 wk), and 92 (39.2%) patients were in group B (> 9 wk). DFS and pathologic response were analyzed as the primary endpoints. The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications and sphincter preservation. RESULTS For the 231 patients included, surgery was performed at ≤ 9 wk in 139 (60.2%) patients and at > 9 wk in 92 (39.8%). The patients' clinical characteristics, surgical results, and tumor outcomes were analyzed through univariate analysis combined with multivariate regression analysis. The overall pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 27.2% (n = 25) in the longer time interval group (> 9 wk) and 10.8% (n = 15) in the shorter time interval group (≤ 9 wk, P = 0.001). The postoperative complications did not differ between the groups (group A, 5% vs group B, 5.4%; P = 0.894). Surgical procedures for sphincter preservation were performed in 113 (48.9%) patients, which were not significantly different between the groups (group A, 52.5% vs group B, 43.5%; P = 0.179). The pCR rate was an independent factor affected by time interval (P = 0.009; odds ratio [OR] = 2.668; 95%CI: 1.276-5.578). Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression analysis showed that the longer time interval (> 9 wk) was a significant independent prognostic factor for DFS (P = 0.032; OR = 2.295; 95%CI: 1.074-4.905), but the time interval was not an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION A longer time interval to surgery after neoadjuvant therapy may improve the pCR rate and DFS but has little impact on postoperative complications and sphincter preservation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shi-Wen Mei
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Zheng Liu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Fang-Ze Wei
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Jia-Nan Chen
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Zhi-Jie Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Hai-Yu Shen
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Juan Li
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Fu-Qiang Zhao
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Wei Pei
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Zheng Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Xi-Shan Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| | - Qian Liu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Does Timing Matter? Surgical Outcomes in High-Grade Sarcomas after Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy. J Surg Res 2020; 254:118-124. [PMID: 32428729 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2019] [Revised: 03/16/2020] [Accepted: 04/11/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The impact of time to surgical resection after neoadjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in the high-grade soft tissue and retroperitoneal sarcomas has not been well established. We aimed to evaluate how surgical timing from EBRT affects oncologic and perioperative outcomes. METHODS We performed a single institution retrospective cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven, high-grade sarcoma who completed neoadjuvant EBRT and resection from January 1, 1999 to September 1, 2018. We collected demographic and clinicopathologic variables, stratifying patients by time interval between EBRT and surgery: <6, 6-8, 8-10, and >10 wk. Primary outcomes collected were as follows: disease-free survival, overall survival, and perioperative complications. RESULTS Of the 269 patients identified, 146 met inclusion criteria. The median follow-up was 24 mo. Overall and local recurrence were 37% (n = 54) and 14.4% (n = 21), respectively. Time to surgery did not affect recurrence (P = 0.82) or survival (P = 0.88). Positive margins (odds ratio 2.7, confidence interval 1.14, 6.51, P < 0.05) were predictive of recurrence. Primary tumor location, surgical timing, histology, and intraoperative radiation therapy were not associated with differences in recurrence. The overall complication rate was 28%, with 63% from wound infections. Fewer postoperative complications occurred in the < 6-wk cohort versus > 6-wk cohort (15% versus 38%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS We found no difference in oncologic outcomes associated with the timing of surgical resection after EBRT. Patients undergoing resection >6 wk were at higher risk for all complications without impacting wound complication rates. Future studies may include preoperative optimization of patients requiring delays in surgical planning to decrease perioperative complication rates.
Collapse
|
22
|
Planellas Giné P, Cornejo Fernández L, Salvador Rosés H, Buxó Pujolras M, Farrés Coll R, Hernandez Yague X, Canals Subirats E, Gil Garcia J, Rodríguez Hermosa JI, Codina Cazador A. Delaying surgery by more than 10 weeks after long-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer patients improves pathologic complete response. Updates Surg 2020; 72:453-461. [PMID: 32232742 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-020-00747-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We currently do not know the optimal time interval between the end of chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Longer intervals have been associated with a higher pathological response rate, worse pathological outcomes and more morbidity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect and safety of the current trend of increasing time interval between the end of chemoradiotherapy and surgery (< 10 weeks vs. ≥ 10 weeks) on postoperative morbidity and pathological outcomes. This study analyzed 232 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy from January 2012 to August 2018. 125 patients underwent surgery before 10 weeks from the end of chemoradiotherapy (Group 1) and 107 patients underwent surgery after 10 or more weeks after the end of chemoradiotherapy (Group 2). Results have shown that wait for ≥ 10 weeks did not compromise surgical safety. Pathological complete response and tumor stage was statistically significant among groups. The effect of wait for ≥ 10 weeks before surgery shown higher tumor regression than the first group (Group 1, 12.8% vs Group 2, 31.8%; p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, wait for ≥ 10 weeks was associated with pathological compete response. Patients from the second group were four time more likely to achieve pathologic complete response than patients from the first group (OR, 4.27 95%CI 1.60-11.40; p = 0.004). Patients who undergo surgery after ≥ 10 weeks of the end of chemoradiotherapy are four time more likely to achieve complete tumor remission without compromise surgical safety or postoperative morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pere Planellas Giné
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain.
- Girona Biomedical Research Foundation (IdIBGI), Girona, Spain.
| | | | - Helena Salvador Rosés
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain
| | | | - Ramon Farrés Coll
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain
- Girona Biomedical Research Foundation (IdIBGI), Girona, Spain
| | - Xavier Hernandez Yague
- Section of Oncology, Institut Catala de Oncologia, "Doctor Josep Trueta", University Hospital, Girona, Spain
| | - Eugeni Canals Subirats
- Section of Radiotherapy, Institut Catala de Oncologia, "Doctor Josep Trueta", University Hospital, Girona, Spain
| | - Júlia Gil Garcia
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain
- Girona Biomedical Research Foundation (IdIBGI), Girona, Spain
| | - Jose Ignacio Rodríguez Hermosa
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain
- Girona Biomedical Research Foundation (IdIBGI), Girona, Spain
| | - Antoni Codina Cazador
- Section of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Girona, France Avenue s/n, 17007, Girona, Spain
- Girona Biomedical Research Foundation (IdIBGI), Girona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Yang J, Chen Q, Li J, Song Z, Cheng Y. Short-Term Clinical and Oncological Outcome of Prolonging Operation Interval After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Middle and Low Rectal Cancer. Cancer Manag Res 2020; 12:2315-2325. [PMID: 32273768 PMCID: PMC7108698 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s245794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2020] [Accepted: 03/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to evaluate the short-term clinical and oncological outcome of prolonging operation interval to 11 weeks after the end of radiotherapy for locally advanced middle and low rectal cancer. Methods A total of 123 patients with stage II/III (cT3/T4 or N+) low and middle rectal cancer who had undergone operation after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were selected. According to the interval time between the last radiotherapy and operation, they were assigned to a short-interval group (SG, <11 weeks, n=66) and long-interval group (LG, ≥11 weeks, n=57). The relations among interval time and short-term clinical outcome and oncological outcome were analyzed. Results The analysis found that basic information, clinical characteristics, and preoperative treatment between the two groups had no significant difference. There were no differences in operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications. The rate of sphincter preservation in the low and middle rectum was 66.7% in the short-interval group and 59.7% in the long-interval group (P=0.42). The incidence of anastomotic leak in the long-interval group was higher than that in the short-interval group (P=0.08). There was no significant difference in the recovery time of intestinal function and median duration of hospitalization between the two groups. The pathological complete remission rate was 17.07%. Multivariate analysis showed interval time had no influence on pathological complete remission. There was no significant difference in 3-year overall survival and 3-year disease-free survival between the two groups. The risk of recurrence and metastasis in patients with positive lymph nodes was higher than those with negative lymph nodes (P<0.05), HR=4.812 (95% CI 2.4–9.648). Conclusion Prolonging the interval time of operation to 11 weeks after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for middle and low rectal cancer does not improve the pathologic complete remission, morbidity, and mortality. There was no significant effect on oncologic outcome after prolonging the operation interval. Therefore, it is safe to prolong the interval of operation to 11 weeks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jianguo Yang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China
| | - Qingwei Chen
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China
| | - Jindou Li
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhiyang Song
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China
| | - Yong Cheng
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Does A Longer Waiting Period After Neoadjuvant Radio-chemotherapy Improve the Oncological Prognosis of Rectal Cancer?: Three Years' Follow-up Results of the Greccar-6 Randomized Multicenter Trial. Ann Surg 2020; 270:747-754. [PMID: 31634178 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003530] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to report the 3-year survival results of the GRECCAR-6 trial. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Current data on the effect of an extended interval between radiochemotherapy (RCT) and resection for rectal cancer on the rate of complete pathological response (pCR = ypT0N0) is controversial. Furthermore, its effect on oncological outcomes is unknown. METHODS The GRECCAR-6 trial was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or TxN+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45-50 Gy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period. Primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rates. RESULTS A total of 265 patients from 24 participating centers were enrolled. A total of 253 patients underwent a mesorectal excision. Overall pCR rate was 17% (43/253). Mean follow-up from surgical resection was 32 ± 8 months. Twenty-four deaths occurred with an 89% OS at 3 years. DFS was 68.7% at 3 years (75 recurrences). Three-year local and distant recurrences were 7.9% and 23.8%, respectively. The randomization group had no impact on the 3-year OS (P = 0.8868) or DFS (P = 0.9409). Distant (P = 0.7432) and local (P = 0.3944) recurrences were also not influenced by the waiting period. DFS was independently influenced by 3 factors: circumferential radial margin (CRM) ≤1 mm [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.17-3.51], ypT3-T4 (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.19-6.08) and positive lymph nodes (HR = 3.62; 95% CI, 1.89-6.91). CONCLUSION Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence on the oncological outcomes of T3/T4 rectal cancers.
Collapse
|
25
|
Jin F, Luo H, Zhou J, Wu Y, Sun H, Liu H, Zheng X, Wang Y. Dose-time fractionation schedules of preoperative radiotherapy and timing to surgery for rectal cancer. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2020; 12:1758835920907537. [PMID: 32165928 PMCID: PMC7052459 DOI: 10.1177/1758835920907537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2018] [Accepted: 01/20/2020] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is extensively used prior to surgery for rectal cancer to provide significantly better local control, but the radiotherapy (RT), as the other component of CRT, has been subject to less interest than the drug component in recent years. With considerable developments in RT, the use of advanced techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in rectal cancer, is garnering more attention nowadays. The radiation dose can be better conformed to the target volumes with possibilities for synchronous integrated boost without increased complications in normal tissue. Hopefully, both local recurrence and toxicities can be further reduced. Although those seem to be of interest, many issues remain unresolved. There is no international consensus regarding the radiation schedule for preoperative RT for rectal cancer. Moreover, an enormous disparity exists regarding the RT delivery. With the advent of IMRT, variations will likely increase. Moreover, time to surgery is also quite variable, as it depends upon the indication for RT/CRT in the clinical practices. In this review, we discuss the options and problems related to both the dose-time fractionation schedule and time to surgery; furthermore, it addresses the research questions that need answering in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fu Jin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Huanli Luo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Juan Zhou
- Forensic Identification Center, Southwest
University of Political Science and Law, Chongqing, PR China
| | - Yongzhong Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, People’s Republic of China
| | - Hao Sun
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, PR China
| | - Hongliang Liu
- Department of Anesthesiology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, PR China
| | - Xiaodong Zheng
- Department of Science Education, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, PR China
| | - Ying Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chongqing
University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing
Cancer Hospital, 181 Hanyu Road, Shapingba District, Chongqing 400030,
China
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Lichthardt S, Wagner J, Löb S, Matthes N, Kastner C, Anger F, Germer CT, Wiegering A. Pathological complete response due to a prolonged time interval between preoperative chemoradiation and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer: analysis from the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry. BMC Cancer 2020; 20:49. [PMID: 31959130 PMCID: PMC6971897 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-020-6538-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2019] [Accepted: 01/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is the recommended standard of care for patients with local advanced rectal cancer. However, it remains unclear, whether a prolonged time interval to surgery results in an increased perioperative morbidity, reduced TME quality or better pathological response. Aim of this study was to determine the time interval for best pathological response and perioperative outcome compared to current recommended interval of 6 to 8 weeks. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry. Patients were grouped for the time intervals of “less than 6 weeks”, “6 to 8 weeks”, “8 to 10 weeks” and “more than 10 weeks”. Primary endpoint was pathological response, secondary endpoint TME quality and complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Results Due to our inclusion criteria (preoperative chemoradiation, surgery in curative intention, M0), 1.809 of 9.560 patients were suitable for analysis. We observed a trend for increased rates of pathological complete response (pCR: ypT0ypN0) and pathological good response (pGR: ypT0-1ypN0) for groups with a prolonged time interval which was not significant. Ultimately, it led to a steady state of pCR (16.5%) and pGR (22.6%) in “8 to 10” and “more than 10” weeks. We were not able to observe any differences between the subgroups in perioperative morbidity, proportion of rectal extirpation (for cancer of the lower third) or difference in TME quality. Conclusion A prolonged time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiation can be performed, as the rate of pCR seems to be increased without influencing perioperative morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sven Lichthardt
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Johanna Wagner
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Stefan Löb
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Niels Matthes
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Caroline Kastner
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Friedrich Anger
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Christoph-Thomas Germer
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany.,University of Wuerzburg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Armin Wiegering
- Department of General, Visceral, Transplant, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, Oberduerrbacherstr. 6, 97080, Wuerzburg, Germany. .,University of Wuerzburg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, Wuerzburg, Germany. .,Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Biocenter, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Gastrointestinal Malignancies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Triage to Surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 2020; 24:2357-2373. [PMID: 32607860 PMCID: PMC7325836 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-020-04712-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread cancelation of electively scheduled surgeries, including for colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. The American College of Surgeons and the Society of Surgical Oncology have released guidelines for triage of these procedures. We seek to synthesize available evidence on delayed resection and oncologic outcomes, while also providing a critical assessment of the released guidelines. METHODS A systematic review was conducted to identify literature between 2005 and 2020 investigating the impact of time to surgery on oncologic outcomes in colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. RESULTS For colorectal cancer, 1066 abstracts were screened and 43 papers were included. In primarily resected colon cancer, delay over 30 to 40 days is associated with lower survival. In rectal cancer, time to surgery over 7 to 8 weeks following neoadjuvant therapy is associated with decreased survival. Three hundred ninety-four abstracts were screened for pancreatic cancer and nine studies were included. Two studies demonstrate increased unexpected progression with delayed surgery over 30 days. Out of 633 abstracts screened for gastric cancer, six studies were included. No identified study demonstrated worse survival with increased time to surgery. CONCLUSION Moderate evidence suggests that delayed resection of colorectal cancer worsens survival; the impact of time to surgery on gastric and pancreatic cancer outcomes is uncertain. Early resection of gastrointestinal malignancies provides the best chance for curative therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of procedures should account for available evidence on time to surgery and oncologic outcomes.
Collapse
|
28
|
Delitto D, George TJ, Loftus TJ, Qiu P, Chang GJ, Allegra CJ, Hall WA, Hughes SJ, Tan SA, Shaw CM, Iqbal A. Prognostic Value of Clinical vs Pathologic Stage in Rectal Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2019; 110:460-466. [PMID: 29165692 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djx228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2017] [Accepted: 09/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is currently standard of care in stage II-III rectal cancer, resulting in tumor downstaging for patients with treatment-responsive disease. However, the prognosis of the downstaged patient remains controversial. This work critically analyzes the relative contribution of pre- and post-therapy staging to the anticipated survival of downstaged patients. Methods The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with rectal cancer treated with transabdominal resection between 2004 and 2014. Stage II-III patients downstaged with neoadjuvant radiation were compared with stage I patients treated with definitive resection alone. Patients with positive surgical margins were excluded. Overall survival was evaluated using both Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards models. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results A total of 44 320 patients were eligible for analysis. Survival was equivalent for patients presenting with cT1N0 disease undergoing resection (mean survival = 113.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 110.8 to 115.3 months) compared with those downstaged to pT1N0 from both cT3N0 (mean survival = 114.9 months, 95% CI = 110.4 to 119.3 months, P = .12) and cT3N1 disease (mean survival = 115.4 months, 95% CI = 110.1 to 120.7 months, P = .22). Survival statistically significantly improved in patients downstaged to pT2N0 from cT3N0 disease (mean survival = 109.0 months, 95% CI = 106.7 to 111.2 months, P < .001) and cT3N1 (mean survival = 112.8 months, 95% CI = 110.0 to 115.7 months, P < .001), compared with cT2N0 patients undergoing resection alone (mean survival = 100.0 months, 95% CI = 97.5 to 102.5 months). Multiple survival analysis confirmed that final pathologic stage dictated long-term outcomes in patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiation (hazard ratio [HR] of pT2 = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.41; HR of pT3 = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.61 to 2.05; HR of pT4 = 2.72, 95% CI = 2.28 to 3.25, all P ≤ .001 vs pT1; HR of pN1 = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.41 to 1.59; HR of pN2 = 2.17, 95% CI = 2.00 to 2.35, both P < .001 vs pN0); while clinical stage at presentation had little to no predictive value (HR of cT2 = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.95, P = .008; HR of cT3 = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.72 to 0.96, P = .009; HR of cT4 = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.21, P = .87 vs cT1; HR of cN1 = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.02, P = .19; HR of cN2 = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.08, P = .48 vs cN0). Conclusions Survival in patients with rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant radiation is driven by post-therapy pathologic stage, regardless of pretherapy clinical stage. These data will further inform prognostic discussions with patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Delitto
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Thomas J George
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Tyler J Loftus
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Peihua Qiu
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - George J Chang
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Carmen J Allegra
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - William A Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Steven J Hughes
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Sanda A Tan
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Christiana M Shaw
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| | - Atif Iqbal
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Ryan ÉJ, O'Sullivan DP, Kelly ME, Syed AZ, Neary PC, O'Connell PR, Kavanagh DO, Winter DC, O'Riordan JM. Meta-analysis of the effect of extending the interval after long-course chemoradiotherapy before surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2019; 106:1298-1310. [PMID: 31216064 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2019] [Revised: 03/27/2019] [Accepted: 04/01/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The current standard of care in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Surgery is conventionally performed approximately 6-8 weeks after nCRT. This study aimed to determine the effect on outcomes of extending this interval. METHODS A systematic search was performed for studies reporting oncological results that compared the classical interval (less than 8 weeks) from the end of nCRT to TME with a minimum 8-week interval in patients with LARC. The primary endpoint was the rate of pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival, local recurrence and distant metastasis rates, R0 resection rates, completeness of TME, margin positivity, sphincter preservation, stoma formation, anastomotic leak and other complications. A meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS Twenty-six publications, including four RCTs, with 25 445 patients were identified. A minimum 8-week interval was associated with increased odds of pCR (odds ratio (OR) 1·41, 95 per cent c.i. 1·30 to 1·52; P < 0·001) and tumour downstaging (OR 1·18, 1·05 to 1·32; P = 0·004). R0 resection rates, TME completeness, lymph node yield, sphincter preservation, stoma formation and complication rates were similar between the two groups. The increased rate of pCR translated to reduced distant metastasis (OR 0·71, 0·54 to 0·93; P = 0·01) and overall recurrence (OR 0·76, 0·58 to 0·98; P = 0·04), but not local recurrence (OR 0·83, 0·49 to 1·42; P = 0·50). CONCLUSION A minimum 8-week interval from the end of nCRT to TME increases pCR and downstaging rates, and improves recurrence-free survival without compromising surgical morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- É J Ryan
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - D P O'Sullivan
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - M E Kelly
- Surgical Professorial Unit, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - A Z Syed
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - P C Neary
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - P R O'Connell
- Surgical Professorial Unit, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - D O Kavanagh
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - D C Winter
- Surgical Professorial Unit, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - J M O'Riordan
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Manur JG, Patel RB, Chandramouli S. Efficacy of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in downstaging rectal cancer and its impact on the long-term outcome. South Asian J Cancer 2019; 8:98-101. [PMID: 31069187 PMCID: PMC6498706 DOI: 10.4103/sajc.sajc_203_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Response to preoperative chemoradiation (PRTCT) for rectal cancer predicts the long-term outcome. Context: Tertiary care hospital. Aims: The aim is to study the factors affecting the response to chemoradiation. Settings and Design: Retrospective. Materials and Methods: Twenty-three patients of rectal cancer undergoing PRTCT followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy were followed up for 20–56 months. Postoperative response, tumor downstaging and nodal downstaging were correlated with the disease status. Results: Tumor downstaging was seen in 11 (50%) and nodal downstaging in 12 (63.15%) patients. Nodal downstaging was statistically significant with P = 0.004. Pathological complete response (PCR) was seen in one patient and partial response (PR) in 17 patients. Thirteen (72.2% of patients) were alive and disease free and the negative nodal status correlated with long-term control with P = 0.04. Conclusion: Most patients of rectal cancer show PR to PRTCT, and the benefit is more for node-positive patients. Nodal PCR is associated with a higher chance of long-term disease control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Sathish Chandramouli
- Department of Surgical Oncology, M. S. Ramaiah Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Standardised reports with a template format are superior to free text reports: the case for rectal cancer reporting in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 2019; 29:5121-5128. [PMID: 30796574 PMCID: PMC6682848 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06028-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2018] [Revised: 01/03/2019] [Accepted: 01/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Rectal cancer staging with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows accurate assessment and preoperative staging of rectal cancers. Therefore, complete MRI reports are vital to treatment planning. Significant variability may exist in their content and completeness. Template-style reporting can improve reporting standards, but its use is not widespread. Given the implications for treatment, we have evaluated current clinical practice amongst specialist gastrointestinal (GI) radiologists to measure the quality of rectal cancer staging MRI reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixteen United Kingdom (UK) colorectal cancer multi-disciplinary teams (CRC-MDTs) serving a population over 5 million were invited to submit up to 10 consecutive rectal cancer primary staging MRI reports from January 2016 for each radiologist participating in the CRC-MDT. Reports were compared to a reference standard based on recognised staging and prognostic factors influencing case management RESULTS: Four hundred ten primary staging reports were submitted from 41 of 42 (97.6%) eligible radiologists. Three hundred sixty reports met the inclusion criteria, of these, 81 (22.5%) used a template. Template report usage significantly increased recording of key data points versus non-template reports for extra-mural venous invasion (EMVI) status (98.8% v 51.6%, p < 0.01) and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status (96.3% v 65.9%, p < 0.01). Local tumour stage (97.5% v 93.5%, NS) and nodal status (98.8% v 96.1%, NS) were reported and with similar frequency. CONCLUSION Rectal cancer primary staging reports do not meet published standards. Template-style reports have significant increases in the inclusion of key tumour descriptors. This study provides further support for their use to improve reporting standards and outcomes in rectal cancer. KEY POINTS • MRI primary staging of rectal cancer requires detailed tumour descriptions as these alter the neoadjuvant and surgical treatments. • Currently, rectal cancer MRI reports in clinical practice do not provide sufficient detail on these tumour descriptors. • The use of template-style reports for primary staging of rectal cancer significantly improves report quality compared to free-text reports.
Collapse
|
32
|
Detering R, Borstlap WAA, Broeders L, Hermus L, Marijnen CAM, Beets-Tan RGH, Bemelman WA, van Westreenen HL, Tanis PJ. Cross-Sectional Study on MRI Restaging After Chemoradiotherapy and Interval to Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Influence on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 2018; 26:437-448. [PMID: 30547330 PMCID: PMC6341052 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-018-07097-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2018] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
Background The time interval between CRT and surgery in rectal cancer patients is still the subject of debate. The aim of this study was to first evaluate the nationwide use of restaging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its impact on timing of surgery, and, second, to evaluate the impact of timing of surgery after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on short- and long-term outcomes. Methods Patients were selected from a collaborative rectal cancer research project including 71 Dutch centres, and were subdivided into two groups according to time interval from the start of preoperative CRT to surgery (< 14 and ≥ 14 weeks). Results From 2095 registered patients, 475 patients received preoperative CRT. MRI restaging was performed in 79.4% of patients, with a median CRT–MRI interval of 10 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 8–11) and a median MRI–surgery interval of 4 weeks (IQR 2–5). The CRT–surgery interval groups consisted of 224 (< 14 weeks) and 251 patients (≥ 14 weeks), and the long-interval group included a higher proportion of cT4 stage and multivisceral resection patients. Pathological complete response rate (n = 34 [15.2%] vs. n = 47 [18.7%], p = 0.305) and CRM involvement (9.7% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.145) did not significantly differ. Thirty-day surgical complications were similar (20.1% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.943), however no significant differences were found for local and distant recurrence rates, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Conclusions These real-life data, reflecting routine daily practice in The Netherlands, showed substantial variability in the use and timing of restaging MRI after preoperative CRT for rectal cancer, as well as time interval to surgery. Surgery before or after 14 weeks from the start of CRT resulted in similar short- and long-term outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-018-07097-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robin Detering
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Wernard A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lisa Broeders
- Scientific Bureau of the Dutch Institute of Clinical Auditing, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Linda Hermus
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Regina G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Delitto D, Loftus TJ, Iqbal A. Pathologic stage dictates survival after neoadjuvant radiation for rectal cancer. Oncotarget 2018; 9:35474-35475. [PMID: 30464801 PMCID: PMC6231453 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.26262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2018] [Accepted: 10/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Delitto
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Tyler J Loftus
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Atif Iqbal
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Chang H, Jiang W, Ye WJ, Tao YL, Wang QX, Xiao WW, Gao YH. Is long interval from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to surgery optimal for rectal cancer in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy?: a prospective observational study. Onco Targets Ther 2018; 11:6129-6138. [PMID: 30288048 PMCID: PMC6160274 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s169985] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the impact of interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) and surgery on therapeutic and adverse effects of surgery, and long-term outcome of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (RC), in the era of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients diagnosed with stage II-III RC and treated with IMRT-based NACRT followed by radical surgery were enrolled consecutively from April 2011 to March 2014. The data of all the patients were collected prospectively and grouped according to their NACRT-to-surgery interval. The therapeutic and adverse effects of surgery, and survivals were compared between the patients with interval ≤7 weeks and those with interval ≥8 weeks. RESULTS A total of 231 patients were eligible for analysis, including 106 cases with interval ≤7 weeks and 125 cases with interval ≥8 weeks. The therapeutic and adverse effects of surgery were similar between these two groups of patients. However, interval ≥8 weeks appeared to lead to poorer overall, distant-metastasis-free and disease-free survivals, compared with interval ≤7 weeks. The HRs were 1.805, 1.714, and 1.796 (P-values were 0.045, 0.049, and 0.028), respectively. CONCLUSION For patients with locally advanced RC, a long NACRT-to-surgery interval might bring a potential risk of increased distant metastasis rather than a better tumor regression in the era of IMRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hui Chang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| | - Wu Jiang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei-Jun Ye
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| | - Ya-Lan Tao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| | - Qiao-Xuan Wang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| | - Wei-Wei Xiao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| | - Yuan-Hong Gao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China, ;
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Kim CW, Kang BM, Kim IY, Kim JY, Park SJ, Park WC, Bae KB, Bae BN, Baek SK, Baik SH, Son GM, Lee YS, Lee SH. Korean Society of Coloproctology (KSCP) trial of cONsolidation Chemotherapy for Locally advanced mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjUvant concurrent chemoraDiothErapy: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (KONCLUDE). BMC Cancer 2018; 18:538. [PMID: 29739356 PMCID: PMC5941462 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4466-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2017] [Accepted: 04/30/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) has been a standard treatment option for locally advanced rectal cancer with improved local control. However, systemic recurrence despite neoadjuvant CRT remained unchanged. The only significant prognostic factor proven to be important was pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant CRT. Several efforts have been tried to improve survival of patients who treated with neoadjuvant CRT and to achieve more pCR including adding cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents, chronologic modification of chemotherapy schedule or adding chemotherapy during the perioperative period. Consolidation chemotherapy is adding several cycles of chemotherapy between neoadjuvant CRT and TME. It could increase pCR rate, subsequently could show better oncologic outcomes. METHODS Patients with advanced mid or low rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant CRT will be included after screening. They will be randomized and assigned to undergo TME followed by 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (control arm) or receive 3 cycles of consolidation chemotherapy before TME, and receive 5 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (experimental arm). The primary endpoints are pCR and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary endpoints are radiotherapy-related complications, R0 resection rate, tumor response rate, surgery-related morbidity, and peripheral neuropathy at 3 year after the surgery. The authors hypothesize that the experimental arm would show a 15% improvement in pCR (15 to 30%) and in 3-year DFS (65 to 80%), compared with the control arm. The accrual period is 2 years and the follow-up period is 3 years. Based on the superiority design, one-sided log-rank test with α-error of 0.025 and a power of 80% was conducted. Allowing for a drop-out rate of 10%, 358 patients (179 per arm) will need to be recruited. Patients will be followed up at every 3 months for 2 years and then every 6 months for 3 years after the last patient has been randomized. DISCUSSION KONCLUDE trial aims to investigate whether consolidation chemotherapy shows better pCR and 3-year DFS than adjuvant chemotherapy alone for the patients who received neoadjuvant CRT for locally advanced rectal cancer. This trial is expected to provide evidence to support clear treatment guidelines for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02843191 (First posted on July 25, 2016).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang Woo Kim
- Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, 892 Dongnam-ro, Gangdong-gu, Seoul 05278 South Korea
- Department of Medicine, the Graduate School of Yonsei University, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Byung Mo Kang
- Department of Surgery, Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 77 Sakju-ro, Chuncheon, South Korea
| | - Ik Yong Kim
- Department of Surgery, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-ro, Wonju, South Korea
| | - Ji Yeon Kim
- Department of Surgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, 282 Munhwa-ro, Daejeon, South Korea
| | - Sun Jin Park
- Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee Medical Center, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, 23 Kyung Hee dae-ro, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Won Cheol Park
- Department of Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, 895 Muwang-ro, Iksan, South Korea
| | - Ki Beom Bae
- Department of Surgery, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, 75 Bokji-ro, Busan, South Korea
| | - Byung-Noe Bae
- Department of Surgery, Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, 1342 Dongil-ro, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Seong Kyu Baek
- Department of Surgery, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 56 Dalseong-ro, Daegu, South Korea
| | - Seung Hyuk Baik
- Department of Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Gyung Mo Son
- Department of Surgery, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Pusan University College of Medicine, 20 Geumo-ro, Yangsan-si, South Korea
| | - Yoon Suk Lee
- Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, The Catholic University College of Medicine, 222 Banpodae-ro, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Suk-Hwan Lee
- Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, 892 Dongnam-ro, Gangdong-gu, Seoul 05278 South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Patel UB, Cervantes A, Fernández-Martos C, Sclafani F, Cunningham D, Nilsson P, Brown G. Session 2: Are we ready for primary chemotherapy in rectal cancer: who, when, why? Colorectal Dis 2018; 20 Suppl 1:56-60. [PMID: 29878678 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
The potential of preoperative chemotherapy in rectal cancer is the subject of investigation in a number of global randomized trials. In this overview and expert discussion, Professor Cervantes summarizes the findings of numerous Phase II trials testing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The crucial points in the next phase of trials include: patient selection, whether radiotherapy can be omitted altogether and whether chemotherapy can be used to augment the initial response to chemoradiotherapy. Finally, with the emergence of Magnetic Resonance Tumour Regression Grade a reliable method for assessing response after initial chemoradiotherapy, we ask if this can be used to drive the use of further selective chemotherapy to augment response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- U B Patel
- London North-West HealthCare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | | | - F Sclafani
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - D Cunningham
- NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - P Nilsson
- Karolinkska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - G Brown
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Patel UB, Blomqvist L, Chau I, Nicholls J, Brown G. Session 3: Beyond TME and radiotherapy MRI evaluation of rectal cancer treatment response. Colorectal Dis 2018; 20 Suppl 1:76-81. [PMID: 29878685 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging plays an increasingly important role in evaluating the effect of cancer treatment. Imaging alone cannot predict pathological complete response and imaging interpretation should be combined with clinical information and endoscopy findings to predict complete response. Professor Blomqvist reviews current and future imaging techniques and whether the quantitative can add significant or important prognostic information over the current qualitative techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- U B Patel
- London North-West HealthCare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | | | - I Chau
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - G Brown
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Crawford A, Firtell J, Caycedo-Marulanda A. How Is Rectal Cancer Managed: a Survey Exploring Current Practice Patterns in Canada. J Gastrointest Cancer 2018; 50:260-268. [DOI: 10.1007/s12029-018-0064-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
|
39
|
Liu Y, Zhang KC, Huang XH, Xi HQ, Gao YH, Liang WQ, Wang XX, Chen L. Timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: Impact on outcomes. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24:257-265. [PMID: 29375211 PMCID: PMC5768944 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i2.257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2017] [Revised: 12/08/2017] [Accepted: 12/12/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM To evaluate whether the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)-surgery interval time significantly impacts the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and long-term survival.
METHODS One hundred and seventy-six patients with gastric cancer undergoing NACT and a planned gastrectomy at the Chinese PLA General Hospital were selected from January 2011 to January 2017. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to investigate the impact of NACT-surgery interval time (< 4 wk, 4-6 wk, and > 6 wk) on pCR rate and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS The NACT-surgery interval time and clinician T stage were independent predictors of pCR. The interval time > 6 wk was associated with a 74% higher odds of pCR as compared with an interval time of 4-6 wk (P = 0.044), while the odds ratio (OR) of clinical T3vs clinical T4 stage for pCR was 2.90 (95%CI: 1.04-8.01, P = 0.041). In Cox regression analysis of long-term survival, post-neoadjuvant therapy pathological N (ypN) stage significantly impacted OS (N0vs N3: HR = 0.16, 95%CI: 0.37-0.70, P = 0.015; N1vs N3: HR = 0.14, 95%CI: 0.02-0.81, P = 0.029) and disease-free survival (DFS) (N0vs N3: HR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.24-0.52, P = 0.005; N1vs N3: HR = 0.17, 95%CI: 0.02-0.71, P = 0.020). The surgical procedure also had a positive impact on OS and DFS. The hazard ratio of distal gastrectomy vs total gastrectomy was 0.12 (95%CI: 0.33-0.42, P = 0.001) for OS, and 0.13 (95%CI: 0.36-0.44, P = 0.001) for DFS.
CONCLUSION The NACT-surgery interval time is associated with pCR but has no impact on survival, and an interval time > 6 wk has a relatively high odds of pCR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Liu
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Ke-Cheng Zhang
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Xiao-Hui Huang
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Hong-Qing Xi
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Yun-He Gao
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Wen-Quan Liang
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Xin-Xin Wang
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| | - Lin Chen
- Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Lefevre JH, Mineur L, Kotti S, Rullier E, Rouanet P, de Chaisemartin C, Meunier B, Mehrdad J, Cotte E, Desrame J, Karoui M, Benoist S, Kirzin S, Berger A, Panis Y, Piessen G, Saudemont A, Prudhomme M, Peschaud F, Dubois A, Loriau J, Tuech JJ, Meurette G, Lupinacci R, Goasgen N, Parc Y, Simon T, Tiret E. Effect of Interval (7 or 11 weeks) Between Neoadjuvant Radiochemotherapy and Surgery on Complete Pathologic Response in Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial (GRECCAR-6). J Clin Oncol 2017; 34:3773-3780. [PMID: 27432930 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2016.67.6049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 312] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose A pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0N0) of a rectal tumor after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) is associated with an excellent prognosis. Several retrospective studies have investigated the effect of increasing the delay after RCT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of increasing the interval between the end of RCT and surgery on the pCR rate. Methods GRECCAR6 was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or Tx N+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45 to 50 Gy with fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included. Patients were randomly included in the 7-week or the 11-week (11w) group. Primary end point was the pCR rate defined as a ypT0N0 specimen (NCT01648894). Results A total of 265 patients from 24 centers were enrolled between October 2012 and February 2015. The majority of the tumors were cT3 (82%). After RCT, surgery was not performed in nine patients (3.4%) because of the occurrence of distant metastasis (n = 5) or other reasons. Two patients underwent local resection of the tumor scar. A total of 47 (18.6%) specimens were classified as ypT0 (four had invaded lymph nodes [8.5%]). The primary end point (ypT0N0) was not different (7 weeks: 20 of 133, 15.0% v 11w: 23 of 132, 17.4%; P = .5983). Morbidity was significantly increased in the 11w group (44.5% v 32%; P = .0404) as a result of increased medical complications (32.8% v 19.2%; P = .0137). The 11w group had a worse quality of mesorectal resection (complete mesorectum [I] 78.7% v 90%; P = .0156). Conclusion Waiting 11 weeks after RCT did not increase the rate of pCR after surgical resection. A longer waiting period may be associated with higher morbidity and more difficult surgical resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jérémie H Lefevre
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Laurent Mineur
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Salma Kotti
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Eric Rullier
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Philippe Rouanet
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Cécile de Chaisemartin
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Bernard Meunier
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Jafari Mehrdad
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Eddy Cotte
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Jérome Desrame
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Mehdi Karoui
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Benoist
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Sylvain Kirzin
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Anne Berger
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Yves Panis
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Guillaume Piessen
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Alain Saudemont
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Michel Prudhomme
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Frédérique Peschaud
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Anne Dubois
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Jérome Loriau
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Jean-Jacques Tuech
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Guillaume Meurette
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Renato Lupinacci
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Nicolas Goasgen
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Yann Parc
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Tabassome Simon
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| | - Emmanuel Tiret
- Jérémie H. Lefevre, Salma Kotti, Yann Parc, Tabassome Simon, and Emmanuel Tiret, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Sorbonne Universités; Mehdi Karoui, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Pitié-Salpétrière; Anne Berger, CHU Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou; Jérome Loriau, Hôpital Saint-Joseph; Renato Lupinacci, Hôpital Croix Saint-Simon; Nicolas Goasgen, Hôpital des Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, Paris; Laurent Mineur, Sainte-Camille Institut, Avignon; Eric Rullier, CHU Saint-André, Bordeaux; Philippe Rouanet, Val d'Aurelle Institut, Montpellier; Cécile de Chaisemartin, Paoli-Calmettes Institut, Marseille CHU, Marseille; Bernard Meunier, CHU Rennes, Rennes; Jafari Mehrdad, Oscar Lambret Center; Guillaume Piessen and Alain Saudemont, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille; Eddy Cotte, CHU Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite; Jérome Desrame, Jean Mermoz Institut, Lyon; Stéphane Benoist, CHU Bicètre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre; Sylvain Kirzin, CHU Purpan, Toulouse; Yves Panis, Hôpital Beaujon, Université Paris VII, Clichy; Michel Prudhomme, CHU Carémeau, Nîmes; Frédérique Peschaud, CHU Ambroise-Paré, Boulogne-Billancourt; Anne Dubois, CHU Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand; Jean-Jacques Tuech, CHU, Rouen; and Guillaume Meurette, CHU Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Lombardi VRM, Carrera I, Cacabelos R. In vitro and in vivo cytotoxic effect of AntiGan against tumor cells. Exp Ther Med 2017; 15:2547-2556. [PMID: 29467852 PMCID: PMC5792761 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2017.5681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2017] [Accepted: 08/23/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Novel effective chemopreventive agents against cancer are required to improve current therapeutic rates. The aim of the present study was to investigate the anti-carcinogenesis effect of AntiGan, an extract obtained from the European conger eel, Conger conger, in vitro (human tumor cell lines) and in vivo (murine model of colitis) models. The potential apoptogenic activity after 24 h of incubation with 10, 25 and 50 µl/ml AntiGan was reported using growth inhibition and apoptosis activity assays. In vivo studies were performed in mice by inducing colitis with oral administration of 2% dextran sulphate sodium (DSS) for 5 weeks. Apoptosis was observed in HL-60, Hs 313.T, SW-480, Caco-2 and HT-29 cell lines. The highest level of growth inhibition was observed in Caco-2 (66, 75.8 and 88.1%), HT-29 (56, 73 and 87.6%) and SW-480 (38.5, 61.6, 78.6%) for AntiGan doses of 10, 25 and 50 µl/ml, respectively, compared to untreated cells, while the results of the expression of genes associated with apoptosis indicated a downregulation of B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2) in all cell lines studied. In vivo, morphopathological alterations in the colon were analyzed by immunohistochemical and staining methods. Tumoral markers, including β-catenin, cyclooxygenase 2 and Bcl-2 were expressed in cryptal cells of the dysplastic colonic mucosa, whereas the levels of interferon-γ expression were also increased when no treatment was applied. In the experimental murine model, the optimal concentration of AntiGan for an effective dose-response was 10% in diet. These results suggested that AntiGan displays a powerful anti-inflammatory effect in DSS-induced colitis, acting as a chemopreventive agent against colon carcinogenesis, most likely due to its apoptogenic peptides that contribute to the induction of apoptosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valter R M Lombardi
- Department of Health Biotechnology, EuroEspes Biotechnology, 15165 Corunna, Spain
| | - Iván Carrera
- Department of Health Biotechnology, EuroEspes Biotechnology, 15165 Corunna, Spain
| | - Ramón Cacabelos
- EuroEspes Biomedical Research Center, Institute for CNS Disorders and Genomic Medicine, 15165 Corunna, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Plastiras A, Sideris M, Gaya A, Haji A, Nunoo-Mensah J, Haq A, Papagrigoriadis S. Waiting Time following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: Does It Really Matter. Gastrointest Tumors 2017; 4:96-103. [PMID: 29594111 DOI: 10.1159/000484982] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2017] [Accepted: 11/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is considered the standard approach before any surgical intervention for locally advanced rectal tumors and has been proven to significantly improve the local recurrence rates of rectal cancer. However, the optimal timing of surgical resection after neoadjuvant CRT remains debatable. Objective and Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 65 consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative CRT followed by surgical resection in order to evaluate the optimal time for surgical treatment. We used two alternative groups for analysis: patients who underwent surgery up to 6 weeks after CRT (n = 28) and those who underwent surgery 6 weeks or more after CRT (n = 27). Also, we compared patients who were operated on within 3 months (n = 39) with those who underwent surgical resection after more than 3 months (n = 16). Nonresponders to CRT were excluded from the analysis. Results There was no statistically significant association between waiting period post CRT and radiological downstaging for any group (p > 0.05 for any association). Also, there was no association between recurrence of disease, cancer-related deaths, perineural invasion, or positive lymph node ratio and any waiting period up to 3 months (p > 0.05 for all associations). Conclusion In this small exploratory study there was no evident difference in outcome according to timing of surgery, which suggests that further research in larger cohorts is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aris Plastiras
- King's College Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michail Sideris
- King's College Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Andy Gaya
- Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Amyn Haji
- King's College Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Asif Haq
- King's College Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Lee SW, Lee JH, Lee IK, Oh ST, Kim DY, Kim TH, Oh JH, Baek JY, Chang HJ, Park HC, Kim HC, Chie EK, Nam TK, Jang HS. The Impact of Surgical Timing on Pathologic Tumor Response after Short Course and Long Course Preoperative Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res Treat 2017; 50:1039-1050. [PMID: 29161802 PMCID: PMC6056970 DOI: 10.4143/crt.2017.252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2017] [Accepted: 11/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose A pooled analysis of multi-institutional trials was performed to analyze the effect of surgical timing on tumor response by comparing short course concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with long course CCRT followed by delayed surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. Materials and Methods Three hundred patients with cT3-4N0-2 rectal adenocarcinoma were included. Long course patients from KROG 14-12 (n=150) were matched 1:1 to 150 short course patients from KROG 10-01 (NCT01129700) and KROG 11-02 (NCT01431599) according to stage, age, and other risk factors. The primary endpoint was to determine the interval between surgery and the last day of neoadjuvant CCRT which yields the best tumor response after the short course and long course CCRT. Downstaging was defined as ypT0-2N0M0 and pathologic complete response (ypCR) was defined as ypT0N0M0, respectively. Results Both the long and short course groups achieved lowest downstaging rates at < 6 weeks (long 20% vs. short 8%) and highest downstaging rates at 6-7 weeks (long 44% vs. short 40%). The ypCR rates were lowest at < 6 weeks (both long and short 0%) and highest at 6-7 weeks (long 21% vs. short 11%) in both the short and long course arms. The downstaging and ypCR rates of long course group gradually declined after the peak at 6-7 weeks and those of the short course group trend to constantly increase afterwards. Conclusion It is optimal to perform surgery at least 6 weeks after both the short course and long course CCRT to obtain maximal tumor regression in locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sea-Won Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jong Hoon Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - In Kyu Lee
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seong Taek Oh
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dae Yong Kim
- Center for Colorectal Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Tae Hyun Kim
- Center for Colorectal Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Jae Hwan Oh
- Center for Colorectal Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Ji Yeon Baek
- Center for Colorectal Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Hee Jin Chang
- Center for Colorectal Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Hee Chul Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hee Cheol Kim
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eui Kyu Chie
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Taek-Keun Nam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea
| | - Hong Seok Jang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Du D, Su Z, Wang D, Liu W, Wei Z. Optimal Interval to Surgery After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2017; 17:13-24. [PMID: 29153429 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2017.10.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2017] [Revised: 10/10/2017] [Accepted: 10/14/2017] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the influence of a waiting interval of ≥ 8 weeks between the end of preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and surgery on the outcomes of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. We conducted a comprehensive literature review of retrospective and prospective studies from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to investigate the length of the preoperative nCRT-surgery waiting interval and outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. The primary outcome measure was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary outcome measures included overall survival, disease-free survival, operative time, and the incidence of local recurrence, postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, and sphincter-preserving surgery. Standardized mean differences and risk ratios were calculated. Thirteen studies involving 19,652 patients were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that pCR was significantly increased in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and a waiting interval of ≥ 8 weeks between preoperative nCRT and surgery compared to a waiting interval of < 8 weeks, or a waiting interval of > 8 weeks compared to ≤ 8 weeks (risk ratio = 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.35; P < .0001). There were no significant differences in overall survival, disease-free survival, operative time, or incidence of local recurrence, postoperative complications, or sphincter-preserving surgery. This study revealed that performing surgery after a waiting interval of ≥ 8 weeks after the end of preoperative nCRT is safe and efficacious for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, significantly improving pCR without increasing operative time or incidence of postoperative complications, compared to a waiting interval of ≤ 8 weeks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Donglin Du
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Zhourong Su
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Dan Wang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Wenwen Liu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Zhengqiang Wei
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Engineer R, Ostwal V, Arya S, Gupta P, Chopra S, Patil P, Jatal S, Saklani A. Additional chemotherapy and salvage surgery for poor response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancers. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2017; 13:322-328. [PMID: 28304150 DOI: 10.1111/ajco.12660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2016] [Revised: 09/27/2016] [Accepted: 10/03/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
AIM A proportion of locally advanced rectal cancer patients who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) are still unresectable. This study was undertaken to assess the outcomes of giving additional chemotherapy to rectal cancer patients with unresectable disease after NACRT. METHODS Patients with poor response to NACRT where mesorectal fascia was still involved on MRI and R0 resection was doubtful, received additional four cycles of chemotherapy with either CAPOX or FOLFIRINOX regimen, and the response was reevaluated with MRI and reassessed for surgical resection. RESULTS Between June 2012 and December 2014, 50 patients received additional chemotherapy with CAPOX regime (19%, 38%) or FOLFIRINOX (31%, 62%) after CRT. Median number of chemotherapy cycles received was four (range 2-8 cycles). Overall 34 (68%) patients underwent exploration and 31 (62%) underwent R0 resection. The median time to surgery following chemoradiation was 5 months (range 3-18 months). Complete pathological response was seen in seven (22%) patients. CONCLUSION Patients with poor response to NACRT may be further downstaged using additional chemotherapy so as to achieve R0 resection in 62% of cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reena Engineer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Vikas Ostwal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Supreeta Arya
- Department of Radiodiagnosis, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Priyamvada Gupta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Supriya Chopra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Prachi Patil
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medicine, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Sudhir Jatal
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Avanish Saklani
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Kaytan-Saglam E, Balik E, Saglam S, Akgün Z, Ibis K, Keskin M, Dagoglu N, Kapran Y, Gulluoglu M. Delayed versus immediate surgery following short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in resectable (T3N0/N+) rectal cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017; 143:1597-1603. [PMID: 28374169 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-017-2406-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2016] [Accepted: 03/24/2017] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) followed by surgery has shown advantage over surgery alone in patients with resectable rectal carcinoma (RC); however, the importance of the timing of surgery after SCRT has not been well defined. This study aimed to investigate the effect of this duration on treatment outcomes. METHODS Patients who underwent surgery after SCRT (25 Gy/500 cGy/daily/5fr, monday-friday) for resectable and infraperitoneal rectal adenocarcinoma (T3N0/(+)) were included into the study. Patients were divided into two groups in terms of the timing of surgery: delayed surgery (>4 weeks) or immediate surgery (<4 weeks). RESULTS A hundred and thirty-six patients were included in the study. Median time between RT and surgery was 4 ± 5.7 (1-58) weeks, where 68% (n = 93) patients underwent delayed surgery (≥4 weeks). The two groups did not differ in terms of surgical margin positivity, pathological tumor regression, N downstaging, or T downstaging (p > 0.05 for all). However, the number of positive lymph nodes was higher in the immediate surgery group [median 3 (0-18) vs. 1 (0-17), p = 0.009]. Median follow-up time was 36 ± 9 (6-93) months. Delayed surgery group had significantly longer mean overall survival (p = 0.038); however, the two groups did not differ in terms of local recurrence, mean time to local recurrence, or mean disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS Our findings seem to support the benefit of a longer time interval between radiotherapy and surgery after short-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy in resectable rectal cancer in terms of overall survival. However, there is a need to better define patient characteristics that might benefit from delayed surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esra Kaytan-Saglam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Emre Balik
- Department of General Surgery, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Sezer Saglam
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istanbul Bilim University, 34349, Istanbul, Turkey.
| | - Züleyha Akgün
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sisli Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Kamuran Ibis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Metin Keskin
- Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Nergis Dagoglu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Yersu Kapran
- Department of Pathology, Koc University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Mine Gulluoglu
- Department of Pathology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Current Views on the Interval Between Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation and Surgery for Rectal Cancer. CURRENT COLORECTAL CANCER REPORTS 2017. [DOI: 10.1007/s11888-017-0370-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
48
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent evidence shows that the majority of rectal cancers demonstrate occult tumor scatter after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy that can extend for several centimeters under adjacent normal-appearing mucosa beside the residual mucosal abnormality or scar. OBJECTIVE This systematic review aimed to determine all of the published selection criteria and technical descriptions for local excision to date with regard to this phenomenon. DATA SOURCES PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched using the following key words: rectal cancer, local excision, radiotherapy, and neoadjuvant. STUDY SELECTION Studies that assessed local excision of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Duplicate series were excluded from final analysis. INTERVENTION All of the data points were tabulated and analyzed using Microsoft Excel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Criteria for patient selection, surgical technique, clinical restaging, pathologic assessment, and indications for completion surgery were analyzed. RESULTS After exclusions, data from 25 studies that in total evaluated local excision in 1001 patients were included. Compared with the single accepted technique of total mesorectal excision, described techniques for local excision after neoadjuvant therapy demonstrate significant variability in many critical technical issues, such as marking/tattooing original tumor margins before neoadjuvant therapy, using pretreatment tumor size/stage as exclusion criteria, and specifically stating lateral excision margins. Where detailed, the majority of local recurrences occurred in patients with clear pathological margins, yet significant variation existed for pathological assessment and reporting, with few studies detailing R status and some not reporting margin status at all. Significant variability also existed for adverse tumor features that mandated completion surgery, and, importantly, many series describe patients refusing completion surgery where indicated. LIMITATIONS We were unable to perform meta-analysis because studies lacked sufficient methodologic homogeneity to synthesize. CONCLUSIONS The observations from this study prompt additional study, standardization of technique, and cautious use of local excision of rectal cancer in the setting of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Collapse
|
49
|
Hu MH, Huang RK, Zhao RS, Yang KL, Wang H. Does neoadjuvant therapy increase the incidence of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for mid and low rectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2017; 19:16-26. [PMID: 27321374 DOI: 10.1111/codi.13424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2015] [Accepted: 04/28/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
AIM The aim was to evaluate the association of neoadjuvant therapy with increases in the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) after middle and low rectal anterior resection. METHOD The electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Ovid were searched between 1980 and 2015. The random effects model was used to model the pooled data to determine the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Q test and I2 statistics. Subgroup, sensitivity and meta-regression analysis was conducted to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS Neoadjuvant therapy was not shown to increase the incidence of postoperative AL as demonstrated by an OR of 1.16 [95% CI 0.99-1.36; P = 0.07 (random effects model)]. The subgroup analysis of neoadjuvant radiotherapy using the random effects model suggested that it did not increase the rate of postoperative AL (OR = 1.24, 95% CI 0.97-1.58; P = 0.08). The subgroup analysis of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy indicated that the rate of postoperative AL again did not increase with an OR = 1.06 [95% CI 0.86-1.30; P = 0.59 (random effects model)]. The interval to surgery after neoadjuvant therapy and preoperative radiotherapy (short or long course) was not associated with an increased incidence of postoperative AL. CONCLUSION Neoadjuvant therapy does not appear to increase the incidence of postoperative AL after anterior resection for mid and low rectal cancer. In addition, neither the interval to surgery after neoadjuvant therapy nor the radiotherapy regimen increases the rate of postoperative AL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M-H Hu
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - R-K Huang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - R-S Zhao
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - K-L Yang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - H Wang
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Holman FA, Haddock MG, Gunderson LL, Kusters M, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, van den Berg HA, Nelson H, Rutten HJT. Results of intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy containing multimodality treatment for locally unresectable T4 rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of the Mayo Clinic Rochester and Catharina Hospital Eindhoven. J Gastrointest Oncol 2016; 7:903-916. [PMID: 28078113 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2016.07.01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study is to analyse the pooled results of intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy (IOERT) containing multimodality treatment of locally advanced T4 rectal cancer, initially unresectable for cure, from the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA (MCR) and Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (CHE), both major referral centers for locally advanced rectal cancer. A rectal tumor is called locally unresectable for cure if after full clinical work-up infiltration into the surrounding structures or organs has been demonstrated, which would result in positive surgical margins if resection was the initial component of treatment. This was the reason to refer these patients to the IOERT program of one of the centers. METHODS In the period from 1981 to 2010, 417 patients with locally unresectable T4 rectal carcinomas at initial presentation were treated with multimodality treatment including IOERT at either one of the two centres. The preferred treatment approach was preoperative (chemo) radiation and intended radical surgery combined with IOERT. Risk factors for local recurrence (LR), cancer specific survival, disease free survival and distant metastases (DM) were assessed. RESULTS A total of 306 patients (73%) underwent a R0 resection. LRs and metastases occurred more frequently after an R1-2 resection (P<0.001 and P<0.001 respectively). Preoperative chemoradiation (preop CRT) was associated with a higher probability of having a R0 resection. Waiting time after preoperative treatment was inversely related with the chance of developing a LR, especially after R+ resection. In 16% of all cases a LR developed. Five-year disease free survival and overall survival (OS) were 55% and 56% respectively. CONCLUSIONS An acceptable survival can be achieved in treatment of patients with initially unresectable T4 rectal cancer with combined modality therapy that includes preop CRT and IOERT. Completeness of the resection is the most important predictive and prognostic factor in the treatment of T4 rectal cancer for all outcome parameters. IOERT can reduce the LR rate effectively, especially in R+ resected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabian A Holman
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Heidi Nelson
- Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Harm J T Rutten
- ; GROW: School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|