Search

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have marked a new era of cancer treatment, showing remarkable efficacy in a wide range of solid malignancies. In colorectal cancer (CRC), however, the therapeutic potential of ICIs is limited to the small group (≈5%) of patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/high microsatellite instable (MSI-H) tumours, which are characterised by high mutational/neo-antigen burden, and an inflammatory tumour microenvironment with abundant tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. Over the last few years, research has focused on immuno-modulatory strategies that could overcome the inherent resistance to ICIs that is observed in the vast group (≈95%) of patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR)/microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours. Among these, the combination of ICIs with multi-kinase inhibitors has gained traction in preclinical studies and clinical trials. Thanks to their multiple targets and mechanisms of action, generally involving key cancer pathways such as oncogenesis, angiogenesis, metastasis, and tumour immunity, these agents can exert synergistic effects with ICIs, eventually turning inherently cold cancers into hot tumours, that can be efficiently recognised and targeted by an activated immune system. Regorafenib is routinely used for chemorefractory CRC with limited efficacy. Preliminary evidence, however, suggests that this multi-kinase inhibitor could be an optimal combination partner for ICIs. In this review article, we explain the biological rationale underlying the synergism between regorafenib and ICIs, discuss the available clinical data in CRC, and take a glance into future perspectives by presenting ongoing trials and possible research developments in this setting.

A few months ago, results from two randomised phase III trials of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in locally advanced rectal cancer were presented (RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23), consistently showing better short- and long-term outcomes with TNT as compared with standard neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT). These results represent corroborating evidence in support of a practice that many centres had already implemented based on promising preliminary data. Also, they provide new, high-level evidence to endorse TNT as a new management option in the treatment algorithm of stage II-III rectal cancer in those centres where CRT and SCRT have long remained the only accepted standard neoadjuvant treatments. Having two consistently positive trials is certainly reassuring regarding the potential of TNT as a general treatment approach. Nevertheless, substantial differences between these trials pose important challenges in relation to the generalisability and applicability of their results, and translation of the same into practical clinical recommendations. In this article, we address a number of key questions that the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials have raised among the broad community of gastrointestinal oncologists, proposing an interpretation of the data that may help the decision making, and highlighting grey areas that warrant further investigation., SCOPUS: re.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

In colorectal cancer (CRC), imaging is important in determining tumor stage, selecting treatment strategies, and in assessing response to therapy. However, some challenges remain with established imaging techniques, such as computed tomography, and with some commonly used response criteria, such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, which measures change in size of several target lesions instead of change in tumor morphology or metabolic function. In addition, these assessments are not typically conducted until after 8 weeks of treatment, meaning that potential non-responders are often not identified in a timely manner. Regorafenib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of metastatic CRC, blocks the activity of several protein kinases involved in angiogenesis, oncogenesis, metastasis, and tumor immunity. Timely differentiation of regorafenib responders from non-responders using appropriate imaging techniques that recognize not only changes in tumor size but also changes in tumor density or vasculature, may reduce unnecessary drug-related toxicity in patients who are unlikely to respond to treatment. This review discusses the latest developments in computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography tumor imaging modalities, and how these aid in identifying patients with metastatic CRC who are responders or non-responders to regorafenib treatment., SCOPUS: re.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

While adjuvant chemotherapy is an established treatment for pathological stage II and especially stage III colon cancer, its role in the multimodal management of rectal cancer remains controversial. As a result, there is substantial variation in the use of this treatment in clinical practice. Even among centres and physicians who consider adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard treatment, notable heterogeneity exists with regard to patient selection criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The controversy around this topic is confirmed by the lack of full consensus among national and international clinical guidelines. While most of the clinical trials do not support the contention that adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival outcomes if pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy is also given, these suffer from many limitations that preclude drawing definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, in the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians should be guided by the available data and refrain from extrapolating results of adjuvant colon cancer trials to inform treatment decisions for rectal cancer. Patients should be informed of the evidence gap, be given the opportunity to carefully discuss pros and cons of all the possible management options and be empowered in the decision making. In this article we review the available evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer and propose a risk-adapted decisional algorithm that largely relies on informed patient preferences., SCOPUS: re.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background: While the management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer has rapidly evolved over the last few decades, many grey areas and highly debated topics remain that foster significant variation in clinical practice. We aimed to identify controversial points and evidence gaps in this disease setting by systematically comparing recommendations from national and international clinical guidelines. Methods: Twenty-six clinical questions reflecting practical challenges in the routine management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer patients were selected. Recommendations from the ESMO, NCCN, JSCCR, Australian and Ontario guidelines were extrapolated and compared using a 4-tier classification system (i.e. identical/very similar, similar, slightly different, different). Overall agreement between guidelines (i.e. substantial/complete disagreement, partial disagreement, partial agreement, substantial/complete agreement) was assessed for each clinical question and compared against the highest level of available evidence by using the χ2 statistic test. Results: Guidelines were in substantial/complete agreement, partial agreement, partial disagreement, and substantial/complete disagreement for 8 (30.8%), 2 (7.7%), 7 (26.9%), and 9 (34.6%) clinical questions, respectively. High level of evidence supported clinical recommendations in 3/10 cases (30%) where guidelines were in agreement and in 10/16 cases (62.5%) where guidelines were in disagreement (χ2 = 2.6, p = 0.106). Agreement was frequently reached for questions regarding diagnosis, staging, and radiology/pathology pro-forma reporting, while disagreement characterised most of the treatment-related topics. Conclusions: Substantial variation exists across clinical guidelines in the recommendations for the management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer. This variation is only partly explained by the lack of supporting, high-level evidence., SCOPUS: re.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published