Search

A major advance has been made in the management of rectal cancer, with the emergence in 2021 of total neoadjuvant treatment. The main publications from the RAPIDO and PRODIGE-23 trials reported a significant improvement in progression-free survival and the pathological complete response rate. The aim of this review is to synthesize recent data on neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer, to explain the long-term results of the RAPIDO and PRODIGE-23 trials, and to put them into perspective, considering current advances in de-escalation strategies. The update of the 5-year survival data from the RAPIDO trial highlights an increased risk of loco-regional relapse, with 11.7% of relapses in the experimental group and 8.1% in the control group, while the update of the PRODIGE-23 trial confirms the benefits of this treatment regimen, with a significant improvement in overall survival. In addition, the results of the OPRA and PROPSPECT trials confirm the benefit of total neoadjuvant treatment with induction chemotherapy, as well as the possibility of surgical de-escalation in the OPRA trial and radiotherapy in the PROSPECT trial. The challenge for the future is to identify patients who require total neoadjuvant treatment with the aim of curative surgery to obtain a cure without local or distant relapse, and those for whom therapeutic de-escalation can be envisaged., (Copyright © 2024 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

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.

On the same principle than total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer, the effect of complete mesocolic excision on short and long-term outcomes is actually evaluated for colonic adenocarcinoma. This method, usually performed for left colectomy, offers a surgical specimen of higher quality, with a larger number of lymph nodes harvested. For right colectomy, surgical specifications make it less common complete mesocolic excision and conventional surgery offer comparable outcomes, as regards to postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. No differences are identified between laparoscopic and open surgery. On oncologic outcomes, only two studies report a higher free-disease survival after complete mesocolic excision. Then, there is evidence that complete mesocolic excision offers a higher rate of specimen with extensive lymph node resection, without increased morbidity rate. However, there is limited evidence that it leads to improve long-term oncological outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: After rectal resection for adenocarcinoma, pathological examination may reveal invasion of the distal margin (DM) and/or a circumferential resection margin of the tumor (CRM-T) or of involved nodes (CRM-N) less than or equal to 1 mm. Such findings transform a planned R0 resection to R1., Aim: : The aim was to analyze the impact of an R1 resection on prognosis, recurrence rate, and choice of adjuvant treatment., Patients and Methods: All R1 resections observed between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected. Patients were matched with 80 patients with R0 resections according to age, body mass index, gender, neoadjuvant treatment, type of resection, ypT/pT stages, and N stage., Results: Among 472 rectal resections performed, 40 (8.5%) were R1 (CRM-T=34; CRM-N=11; invaded DM=4). Among the 4 patients with invaded DM, 3 underwent salvage abdominoperineal resection. Of the 12 patients who had not received neoadjuvant treatment, 5 received adjuvant radiotherapy. Mean follow-up was 49.3±29.3 months for the 120 patients; 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 72% and 56%. Comparison between R0 and R1 resections showed a trend toward worse OS in R1 resections: 62% versus 79% (P=0.0954), a significantly worse DFS: 41% versus 65% (P=0.0267). Local recurrence rates were similar: 12% versus 13% (P=0.9177), whereas distant recurrence was significantly more frequent after R1 resection: 56% versus 26% (P=0.0040)., Conclusions: R1 resection is associated with a worse prognosis, but local recurrence rate does not differ significantly from matched R0 resections. The difference was observed for distant recurrences, especially lung, favoring the use of chemotherapy and close surveillance of the thorax.