Search

Background: The success of modern multimodal treatment in rectal cancer is dependent on risk prediction. Better knowledge of the risk of locoregional and distant recurrence, in relation to preoperative treatment, pathological stage, and commonly used risk factors, is needed when deciding on adjuvant therapy and surveillance., Methods: The Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry was used to identify patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma between 2011 and 2018. Readily available variables, including patient, tumor, and treatment factors were exposures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify important risk factors for recurrence and calculate recurrence risks., Results: A total of 9428 curatively resected patients were included and followed for a median of 72 months. Eighteen percent had distal recurrence and 3% had locoregional recurrence at 5 years. Risk factors with major impact on distal recurrence were pT4a (hazard ratio [HR] 5.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3-8.0), pN2b (HR 3.4, 95% CI 2.7-4.2), tumor deposit (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.5-1.9), lymph node yield (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.8), and tumor level 0-5 cm (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.8). Pathologic stage and number of risk factors identified groups with markedly different recurrence risks in all neoadjuvant treatment groups., Conclusions: Readily available risk factors, as a complement to stage, are still valid and robust in all neoadjuvant treatment groups. Tumor deposit is important, while circumferential resection margin might no longer be important with improved oncological treatments and high-quality TME surgery. Tailored surveillance is possible in selected groups using risk stratification based on stage and risk factors., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aim: Extramural venous invasion detected by MRI (mrEMVI) has in several expert centre studies been identified as an important prognostic factor in rectal cancer, and in guiding neoadjuvant therapy. However, population-based evidence for mrEMVI as a predictor for recurrent disease is lacking., Method: This was a multicentre retrospective study based on the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The study period encompassed patients operated with abdominal resection for rectal cancer 2017-2021, with follow-up until January 2023. Patients diagnosed at hospitals with radiological registry data coverage <90% or with metastatic disease were excluded. Pretreatment mrEMVI constituted exposure, while recurrence-free survival was the main outcome. Distant and local recurrence, and overall survival were secondary outcomes, and pretreatment and postoperative scenarios were explored using multivariable Cox regression with multiple imputation. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported., Results: A total of 2737 patients from 13 hospitals were eligible for analysis. Pretreatment mrEMVI was reported in 14.5% of patients, while 71.9% had negative findings and 13.6% had missing data. In the pretreatment scenario, mrEMVI was an independent predictor for worse recurrence-free survival with an adjusted HR of 1.64 (95% CI: 1.31-2.06). In the postoperative MDT setting, the influence of mrEMVI on recurrence-free survival decreased with an adjusted HR of 1.27 (95% CI: 1.00-1.61)., Conclusion: mrEMVI at diagnosis is an independent predictor of recurrence-free survival in an unselected population of rectal cancer patients undergoing abdominal resection., (© 2024 The Author(s). Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Rectal cancer poses challenges in preoperative treatment response, with up to 30% achieving a complete response (CR). Personalized treatment relies on accurate identification of responders at diagnosis. This study aimed to unravel CR determinants, overall survival (OS), and time to recurrence (TTR) using clinical and targeted sequencing data. Analyzing 402 patients undergoing preoperative treatment, tumor stage, size, and treatment emerged as robust response predictors. CR rates were higher in smaller, early-stage, and intensively treated tumors. Targeted sequencing analyzed 216 cases, while 120 patients provided hotspot mutation data. KRAS mutation dramatically reduced CR odds by over 50% (odds ratio [OR] = 0.3 in the targeted sequencing and OR = 0.4 hotspot cohorts, respectively). In contrast, SMAD4 and SYNE1 mutations were associated with higher CR rates (OR = 6.0 and 6.8, respectively). Favorable OS was linked to younger age, CR, and low baseline carcinoembryonic antigen levels. Notably, CR and an APC mutation increased TTR, while a BRAF mutation negatively affected TTR. Beyond tumor burden, SMAD4 and SYNE1 mutations significantly influenced CR. KRAS mutations independently correlated with radiotherapy resistance, and BRAF mutations heightened recurrence risk. Intriguingly, non-responding tumors with initially small sizes carried a higher risk of recurrence. The findings, even if limited in addition to the imperfect clinical factors, offer insights into rectal cancer treatment response, guiding personalized therapeutic strategies. By uncovering factors impacting CR, OS, and TTR, this study underscores the importance of tailored approaches for rectal cancer patients. These findings, based on extensive analysis and mutation data, pave the way for personalized interventions, optimizing outcomes in the challenges of rectal cancer preoperative treatment., (© 2024 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Background: A pathological complete response (pCR) following chemoradiation (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (scRT) leads to a favourable prognosis in patients with rectal cancer. Total neo-adjuvant therapy (TNT) doubles the pCR rate, but it is unknown whether oncological outcomes remain favourable and whether the same characteristics are associated with pCR as after CRT., Methods: Comparison between patients with pCR in the RAPIDO trial in the experimental [EXP] (scRT, chemotherapy, surgery, as TNT) and standard-of-care treatment [STD] (CRT, surgery, postoperative chemotherapy depending on hospital policy) groups. Primary and secondary outcomes were time-to-recurrence (TTR), overall survival (OS) and association between patient, tumour, and treatment characteristics and pCR., Results: Among patients with a resection within six months after preoperative treatment, 120/423 (28%) [EXP] and 57/398 (14%) [STD] achieved a pCR. Following pCR, 5-year cumulative TTR and OS rates in the EXP and STD arms were 8% vs. 7% (hazard ratio 1.04, 95%CI 0.32-3.38) and 94% vs. 93% (hazard ratio 1.41, 95%CI 0.51-3.92), respectively. Besides the EXP treatment (odds ratio 2.70, 95%CI 1.83-3.97), pre-treatment carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) <5, pre-treatment tumour size <40 mm and cT2 were associated with pCR. Distance from the anal verge was the only characteristic with a statistically significant difference in association with pCR between the EXP and STD treatment (P interaction =0.042). pCR rates did not increase with prolonged treatment time., Conclusions: The doubled pCR rate of TNT compared to CRT results in similar oncological outcomes. Characteristics associated with pCR are the EXP treatment, normal CEA, and small tumour size., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest PJN reports honoraria from Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson, and Amgen. GAPH reports consulting fees from Roche, MSD, Amgen and Novartis; consulting fees and research support to their institution from Bristol Myers Squibb; and research support to their institution from Seerave Foundation. SJDT was fully funded, and AGHR and CJHvdV were partially funded by the EU’s Horizon Skłodowska Curie grant award (H2020MSCAITN2019, grant agreement number 857894; project acronym: CAST). BG reports research support from the Swedish Cancer Society. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The first authors had full access to all data and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication. All other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interest to declare. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results. CHS is employed by Roche AB.

Background: Staging and treatment of rectal cancer have evolved over several decades with considerably fewer locoregional recurrences but no marked improved survival since systemic recurrence risks remain virtually unchanged. This development will briefly be summarised followed by a thorough discussion of two recent developments., Methods: A systematic approach towards the literature is aimed at focusing on organ preservation and the delivery of all non-surgical treatments prior to surgery or total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT)., Results: Organ preservation, that is to defer surgery if the tumour happens to disappear completely after any pre-treatment given to locally advanced tumours to decrease recurrence risks has increased in popularity and is, if not universally, widely accepted. To give neo-adjuvant treatment to intentionally obtain a clinically complete remission to avoid surgery is practised in some environments but is mostly still experimental. TNT, that is to provide both radiotherapy and chemotherapy aimed at killing microscopic disease in the pelvis or elsewhere has been subject to several trials. Collectively, they show that the chance of achieving a complete response, pathologically or clinically, has approximately doubled, increasing the chance for organ preservation, and the risk of distant metastasis has decreased at least in some trials. The best schedule remains to be established., Conclusions: To obtain substantial progress and also improve survival, the systemic treatments need to be improved even if preoperative delivery is more effective and better tolerated than postoperative. The locoregional treatment may be further optimised through better risk prediction., Competing Interests: The author reports no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Upsala Medical Society.)

BRAF-V600E mutation (mt) is a strong negative prognostic and predictive biomarker in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Non-V600Emt, designated atypical BRAFmt (aBRAFmt) are rare, and little is known about their frequency, co-mutations and prognostic and predictive role. These were compared between mutational groups of mCRC patients collected from three Nordic population-based or real-world cohorts. Pathology of aBRAFmt was studied. The study included 1449 mCRC patients with 51 (3%) aBRAFmt, 182 (13%) BRAF-V600Emt, 456 (31%) RAS&BRAF wild-type (wt) and 760 (52%) RASmt tumours. aBRAFmt were seen in 2% of real-world and 4% of population-based cohorts. Twenty-six different aBRAFmt were detected, 11 (22%) class 2 (serrated adenocarcinoma in 2/9 tested), 32 (64%) class 3 (serrated in 15/25) and 4 (8%) unclassified. aBRAFmt patients were predominantly male, had more rectal primaries, less peritoneal metastases, deficient mismatch repair in one (2%), and better survival after metastasectomy (89% 5-year overall survival [OS]-rate) compared with BRAF-V600Emt. aBRAFmt and BRAF-V600Emt had poorer performance status and received fewer treatment lines than RAS&BRAFwt and RASmt. OS among aBRAFmt (median 14.4 months) was longer than for BRAF-V600Emt (11.2 months), but shorter than for RAS&BRAFwt (30.5 months) and RASmt (23.4 months). Addition of bevacizumab trended for better OS for the aBRAFmt. Nine patients with aBRAFmt received cetuximab/panitumumab without response. aBRAFmt represents a distinct subgroup differing from other RAS/BRAF groups, with serrated adenocarcinoma in only half. OS for patients with aBRAFmt tumours was slightly better than for BRAF-V600Emt, but worse than for RASmt and RAS&BRAFwt. aBRAFmt should not be a contraindication for metastasectomy., (© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Objective: To analyze risk and patterns of locoregional failure (LRF) in patients of the RAPIDO trial at 5 years., Background: Multimodality treatment improves local control in rectal cancer. Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) aims to improve systemic control while local control is maintained. At 3 years, LRF rate was comparable between TNT and chemoradiotherapy in the RAPIDO trial., Methods: A total of 920 patients were randomized between an experimental (EXP, short-course radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery) and a standard-care group (STD, chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and optional postoperative chemotherapy). LRFs, including early LRF (no resection except for organ preservation/R2 resection) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) after an R0/R1 resection, were analyzed., Results: Totally, 460 EXP and 446 STD patients were eligible. At 5.6 years (median follow-up), LRF was detected in 54/460 (12%) and 36/446 (8%) patients in the EXP and STD groups, respectively ( P =0.07), in which EXP patients were more often treated with 3-dimensional-conformed radiotherapy ( P =0.029). In the EXP group, LRR was detected more often [44/431 (10%) vs. 26/428 (6%); P =0.027], with more often a breached mesorectum (9/44 (21%) vs. 1/26 (4); P =0.048). The EXP treatment, enlarged lateral lymph nodes, positive circumferential resection margin, tumor deposits, and node positivity at pathology were the significant predictors for developing LRR. Location of the LRRs was similar between groups. Overall survival after LRF was comparable [hazard ratio: 0.76 (95% CI, 0.46-1.26); P =0.29]., Conclusions: The EXP treatment was associated with an increased risk of LRR, whereas the reduction in disease-related treatment failure and distant metastases remained after 5 years. Further refinement of the TNT in rectal cancer is mandated., Competing Interests: P.J.N. reports honoraria from Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson, and Amgen. GAPH reports consulting fees from Roche, MSD, Amgen, and Novartis; consulting fees and research support to their institution from Bristol Myers Squibb; and research support to their institution from Seerave Foundation. A.G.H.R. and C.J.H.v.d.V. were partially funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under a Marie SkłodowskaCurie grant award (H2020MSCAITN2019, grant agreement number 857894; project acronym: CAST). M.P.H. reports consulting fees from MSD. J.C. reports consulting fees, travel expenses, and research support to their institution from Pfizer, Ipsen, and Eisai; consulting fees and research support to their institution from Bayer, Novartis, and Advanced Accelerator Applications; consulting fees from Sanofi, Exelixis, and Merck Serono; and research support to their institution from AstraZeneca. B.G. reports research support from the Swedish Cancer Society. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Introduction: Although optimising rectal cancer treatment has reduced local recurrence rates, many patients develop distant metastases (DM). The current study investigated whether a total neoadjuvant treatment strategy influences the development, location, and timing of metastases in patients diagnosed with high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer included in the Rectal cancer And Pre-operative Induction therapy followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial., Material and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to short-course radiotherapy followed by 18 weeks of CAPOX or FOLFOX4 before surgery (EXP), or long-course chemoradiotherapy with optional postoperative chemotherapy (SC-G). Assessments for metastatic disease were performed pre- and post-treatment, during surgery, and 6, 12, 24, 36, and 60 months postoperatively. From randomisation, differences in the occurrence of DM and first site of metastasis were evaluated., Results: In total, 462 patients were evaluated in the EXP and 450 patients in the SC-G groups. The cumulative probability of DM at 5 years after randomisation was 23% [95% CI 19-27] and 30% [95% CI 26-35] (HR 0.72 [95% CI 0.56-0.93]; P = 0.011) in the EXP and SC-G, respectively. The median time to DM was 1.4 (EXP) and 1.3 years (SC-G). After diagnosis of DM, median survival was 2.6 years [95% CI 2.0-3.1] in the EXP and 3.2 years [95% CI 2.3-4.1] in the SC-G groups (HR 1.39 [95% CI 1.01-1.92]; P = 0.04). First occurrence of DM was most often in the lungs (60/462 [13%] EXP and 55/450 [12%] SC-G) or the liver (40/462 [9%] EXP and 69/450 [15%] SC-G). A hospital policy of postoperative chemotherapy did not influence the development of DM., Conclusions: Compared to long-course chemoradiotherapy, total neoadjuvant treatment with short-course radiotherapy and chemotherapy significantly decreased the occurrence of metastases, particularly liver metastases., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Per Nilsson reports honoraria from Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson. Bengt Glimelius reports research support from the Swedish Cancer Society. Geke Hospers reports consulting fees from Roche, MSD, Amgen and Novartis; consulting fee and research support to their institution from Bristol-Myers Squibb; and research support to their institution from Seerave Foundation. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The aim was to investigate gender differences in the likelihood to receive metastatic surgery, and to compare overall survival between men and women, among patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a population-based setting. All Swedish adult patients diagnosed with synchronous mCRC in 2007-2016 were identified using the nationwide colorectal cancer database (CRCBaSe). Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression, comparing the odds of receiving treatment. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival proportions and Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of all-cause mortality rates. All multivariable models were adjusted for age, ASA score, Charlson comorbidity index, year of diagnosis, location of primary tumor and single or multiple metastatic locations. A total of 12 201 patients met the study criteria. Women received 23% less metastatic surgery for mCRC (adjusted OR = 0.77, CI:0.69-0.86) and experienced a slightly higher mortality following diagnosis (adjusted HR = 1.09, CI:1.05-1.14). In analyses restricted to patients who received metastatic surgery, no significant differences in mortality were found. In conclusion, this population-based study showed that women less often received metastatic surgery of mCRC and experienced slightly higher all-cause mortality compared with men. The differences persisted despite adjustments of patient and cancer characteristics. Gender differences in receiving treatment are unacceptable if the underlying explanation cannot be motivated. Further studies are needed to understand if the differences are based on sex (i.e., biology) or gender (including clinically unmotivated differences in treatment approach)., (© 2022 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Background: Survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has markedly improved in patients included in clinical trials. In population-based materials, improvements were seen until about a decade ago, but it is unclear if survival has continued to improve. It is also unclear if regional or gender differences exist., Material and Methods: All patients with mCRC ( N  = 19,566) in Sweden between 2007 and 2016 were identified from the national quality register, SCRCR, with almost complete coverage. Overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of metastatic disease was calculated in two calendar periods, 2007-2011 and 2012-2016. Differences between groups were compared using Cox regression., Results: Median age was 72 years, 55% were males, synchronous presentation was seen in 13,630 patients and metachronous in 5936. In synchronous disease, the primary tumour was removed more often during the first than the second period (51% vs 41%, p  < 0.001). Median OS (mOS) was 14.0 months. It was longer in those with metachronous than synchronous disease (17.6 vs 13.1 months, p  < 0.001) and in males (15.0 vs 12.8 months, p  < 0.001), and markedly influenced by age and primary location. It was longer in patients diagnosed during the second period than during the first (14.9 vs 13.1 months, HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.92), p  < 0.001). This difference was seen in all subgroups according to sex, age, presentation, and sidedness. mOS was about one month shorter in 1/6 healthcare regions, most pronounced during the first period. Differences in median of up to 5 months were seen between the region with the shortest and longest mOS., Conclusions: Overall survival in Swedish patients with mCRC has improved during the past decade but is still substantially worse than reported from clinical trials/hospital-based series, reflecting the selection of patients to trials. Regional differences were seen, but they decreased with time. Women did not have a poorer prognosis in multivariable analyses.

Background: Only a limited proportion of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receives metastatic surgery (including local ablative therapy). The aim was to investigate whether hospital volume and hospital level were associated with the chance of metastatic surgery., Methods: This national cohort retrieved from the CRCBaSe linkage included all Swedish adult patients diagnosed with synchronous mCRC in 2009-2016. The association between annual hospital volume of incident mCRC patients and the chance of metastatic surgery, and survival, were assessed using logistic regression and Cox regression models, respectively. Hospital level (university/non-university) was evaluated as a secondary exposure in a similar manner. Both uni- and multivariable (adjusted for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, year of diagnosis, cancer characteristics and socioeconomic factors) models were fitted., Results: A total of 1,674 (17%) out of 9,968 mCRC patients had metastatic surgery. High hospital volume was not associated with increased odds of metastatic surgery after including hospital level in the model, whereas hospital level was (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 1.94 (1.68-2.24)). All-cause mortality was lower in university versus non-university hospitals (hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.83 (0.78-0.88))., Conclusions: Patients with mCRC initially cared for by a university hospital experienced a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery and had superior overall survival. High hospital volume in itself was not associated with a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery nor a greater survival probability. Additional efforts should be imposed to provide more equal care for mCRC patients across Swedish hospitals., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To identify the main problem areas in the applicability of the current TNM staging system (8 th ed.) for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer and provide practice recommendations on how to handle them., Methods: A global case-based online survey was conducted including 41 image-based rectal cancer cases focusing on various items included in the TNM system. Cases reaching < 80% agreement among survey respondents were identified as problem areas and discussed among an international expert panel, including 5 radiologists, 6 colorectal surgeons, 4 radiation oncologists, and 3 pathologists., Results: Three hundred twenty-one respondents (from 32 countries) completed the survey. Sixteen problem areas were identified, related to cT staging in low-rectal cancers, definitions for cT4b and cM1a disease, definitions for mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement, evaluation of lymph nodes versus tumor deposits, and staging of lateral lymph nodes. The expert panel recommended strategies on how to handle these, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define MRF involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes., Conclusions: The recommendations derived from this global survey and expert panel discussion may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting., Key Points: • Via a case-based online survey (incl. 321 respondents from 32 countries), we identified 16 problem areas related to the applicability of the TNM staging system for the radiological staging and reporting of rectal cancer. • A multidisciplinary panel of experts recommended strategies on how to handle these problem areas, including advice on cT-stage categorization in case of involvement of different layers of the anal canal, specifications on which structures to include in the definition of cT4b disease, how to define mesorectal fascia involvement by the primary tumor and other tumor-bearing structures, how to differentiate and report lymph nodes and tumor deposits on MRI, and how to anatomically localize and stage lateral lymph nodes. • These recommendations may serve as a practice guide and support tool for radiologists (and other clinicians) involved in the staging of rectal cancer and may contribute to improved consistency in radiological staging and reporting., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: The RAPIDO trial demonstrated a decrease in disease-related treatment failure (DrTF) and an increase in pathological complete responses (pCR) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients receiving total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) compared to conventional chemoradiotherapy. This study examines health-related quality of life (HRQL), bowel function, and late toxicity in patients in the trial., Materials and Methods: Patients were randomized between short-course radiotherapy followed by pre-operative chemotherapy (EXP), or chemoradiotherapy and optional post-operative chemotherapy (STD). The STD group was divided into patients who did (STD+) and did not (STD-) receive post-operative chemotherapy. Three years after surgery patients received HRQL (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29 and QLQ-CIPN20) and LARS questionnaires. Patients who experienced a DrTF event before the toxicity assessments (6, 12, 24, or 36 months) were excluded from analyses., Results: Of 574 eligible patients, 495 questionnaires were returned (86%) and 453 analyzed (79% completed within time limits). No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29 or LARS scores. Sensory-related symptoms occurred significantly more often in the EXP group compared to all STD patients, but not compared to STD+ patients. Any toxicity of any grade and grade ≥ 3 toxicity was comparable between the EXP and STD groups at all time-points. Neurotoxicity grade 1-2 occurred significantly more often in the EXP and STD+ group at all time-points compared to the STD- group., Conclusion: The results demonstrate that TNT for LARC, yielding improved DrTF and pCRs, does not compromise HRQL, bowel functional or results in more grade ≥3 toxicity compared to standard chemoradiotherapy at three years after surgery in DrTF-free patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: GAPH reports consulting fees from Roche, MSD, Amgen, and Novartis; consulting fees and research support to their institution from Bristol Myers Squibb; and research support to their institution from Seerave Foundation. AGHR and CJHvdV were partially funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under a Marie Skłodowska Curie grant award (H2020MSCAITN2019, grant agreement number 857894; project acronym: CAST). MPH reports consulting fees from MSD. JC reports consulting fees, travel expenses, and research support to their institution from Pfizer, Ipsen, and Eisai; consulting fees and research support to their institution from Bayer, Novartis, and Advanced Accelerator Applications; consulting fees from Sanofi, Exelixis, and Merck Serono; and research support to their institution from AstraZeneca. PJN reports honoraria from Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson. BG reports research support from the Swedish Cancer Society. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Mucinous rectal cancers are generally associated with poor prognosis. This study aimed to clinically characterize mucinous rectal cancers in a defined region of Sweden., Methods: All patients with rectal cancer in Uppsala and Dalarna, Sweden, between 2010 and 2018, were identified using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Data were verified and updated by way of medical, radiology, and histopathology reports. Patients were selected if magnetic resonance imaging, biopsy, and/or surgical specimen were mucinous. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), time to recurrence (TTR), pattern of metastatization, and downstaging. Risk factors for recurrence were analysed with univariable and multivariable analyses., Results: Of 1220 patients with rectal cancer, 263 (22 per cent) had a mucinous specimen, median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) age was 71 (63-77) years, and 152 (58 per cent) were men. Most were localized in the low-middle rectum (76 per cent) and were stage III (53 per cent), or stage IV (28 per cent). The 5-year OS was 55 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 49 to 62); after total mesorectal excision (n = 164), 5-year OS was 75 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 68 to 83), and 5-year TTR was 68 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 60 to 77). In those with complete response (pCR), pStage I, pStage II, and pStage III, 5-year TTR was 93 per cent, 85 per cent, 74 per cent, and 44 per cent respectively. Synchronous metastasis was most common in the liver (64 per cent) and metachronous in the lungs (58 per cent). pCR was achieved in 14 patients, (13 per cent); whereas T and N category downstaging was achieved in 31 (28 per cent) and 67 patients (61 per cent) respectively. Perineural invasion had the strongest association with recurrence (hazard ratio 6.34, 95 per cent c.i. 2.50 to 16.10)., Conclusion: Mucinous rectal cancers have high recurrence rates, but pCR rate is more than 10 per cent. Perineural invasion is the main feature associated with recurrence., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background: The Stockholm III trial randomly assigned 840 patients to short-course radiotherapy of 5 × 5 Gy with surgery within 1 week (SRT), short-course radiotherapy of 5 × 5 Gy with surgery after 4-8 weeks (SRT-delay), or long-course radiotherapy of 25 × 2 Gy with surgery after 4-8 weeks (LRT-delay). This study details the long-term oncological outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Methods: Patients with biopsy-proven resectable adenocarcinoma of the rectum were included. Primary outcome was time to local recurrence (LR), and secondary endpoints were distant metastases (DMs), overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and HRQoL. Patients were analysed in a three-arm randomization and a short-course radiotherapy comparison., Results: From 1998 to 2013, 357, 355, and 128 patients were randomized to the SRT, SRT-delay, and LRT-delay groups respectively. Median follow-up time was 5.7 (range 5.3-7.6) years. Comparing patients in the three-arm randomization, the incidence of LR was three of 129 patients, four of 128, and seven of 128, and DM 31 of 129 patients, 38 of 128, and 38 of 128 in the SRT, SRT-delay, and LRT-delay groups respectively. In the short-course radiotherapy comparison, the incidence of LR was 11 of 357 patients and 13 of 355, and DM 88 of 357 patients and 82 of 355 in the SRT and SRT-delay groups respectively. No comparisons showed statistically significant differences. Median OS was 8.1 (range 6.9-11.2), 10.3 (range 8.2-12.8), and 10.5 (range 7.0-11.3) years after SRT, SRT-delay, and LRT-delay respectively. Median OS was 8.1 (range 7.2-10.0) years after SRT and 10.2 (range 8.5-11.7) years after SRT-delay. There were no statistically significant differences in HRQoL., Conclusion: After a follow-up of 5 years, delaying surgery for 4-8 weeks after radiotherapy treatment with 5 × 5 Gy was oncologically safe. Long-term HRQoL was similar among the treatment arms., Trial Registration Number: NTC00904813., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background/aim: For patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) extensive surgery is often the only curative option and patient selection is crucial. This study aimed to investigate whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics of the primary tumour can predict oncological outcome after surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC)., Patients and Methods: All patients undergoing surgery for LRRC with a curative intent at the Karolinska University Hospital 2003-2013 were included. MRI examinations of the primary tumour were re-evaluated., Results: In total, 54 patients were included. A tumour volume decrease of <70% after preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (C)RT for the primary tumour was correlated with a lower proportion of R0 resection of the LRRC (OR=0.07, 95% CI=0.01-0.84). No association between MRI characteristics of the primary tumour and prognosis after LRRC surgery was found., Conclusion: Long-term outcomes after surgery for LRRC were not significantly associated with MRI characteristics of the index tumour. However, factors associated with increased risk of R1 resection of LRRC were identified., (Copyright © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score is a new surrogate endpoint to be used in clinical trials for early determination of treatment response to different preoperative therapies. The aim is to further validate the NAR-score, primarily developed using chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with a delay to surgery 6-8 weeks, and explore its value using other schedules., Materials and Methods: The study included all 9978 patients diagnosed with non-metastasized RC in 2007-2015 that had undergone surgery and was registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The patients of interest had either short-course radiotherapy (scRT)/CRT + delayed surgery, long-course radiotherapy (RT) + delayed surgery, (C)RT + additional chemotherapy, primary surgery, or scRT + immediate surgery. The scRT/CRT + delayed surgery groups were further divided based on time to surgery., Results: Mean NAR-score differed significantly (p < 0.0001) between different treatments. (C)RT + additional chemotherapy had the lowest mean score of 16.3 and CRT + delayed surgery had 17.7. There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in overall survival (OS) and time to recurrence (TTR) of patients with a Low NAR-score (<8) compared to those with a High score (>16) for both CRT- and scRT, with a stronger correlation for CRT-patients. C-index for the NAR-score model (0.623) was not superior to when only pathological T- and N-stage was used (0.646)., Conclusions: The NAR-score is prognostic, but it is not better than pT- and pN-stage. However, the NAR-score can still discriminate between two treatments that have different cell killing effect and may still be of value in clinical trials as an easier method than pT- and N-stage., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Systemic relapses remain a major problem in locally advanced rectal cancer. Using short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy and delayed surgery, the Rectal cancer And Preoperative Induction therapy followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial aimed to reduce distant metastases without compromising locoregional control., Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 54 centres in the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain, Slovenia, Denmark, Norway, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, had a biopsy-proven, newly diagnosed, primary, locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma, which was classified as high risk on pelvic MRI (with at least one of the following criteria: clinical tumour [cT] stage cT4a or cT4b, extramural vascular invasion, clinical nodal [cN] stage cN2, involved mesorectal fascia, or enlarged lateral lymph nodes), were mentally and physically fit for chemotherapy, and could be assessed for staging within 5 weeks before randomisation. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a management system with a randomly varying block design (each block size randomly chosen to contain two to four allocations), stratified by centre, ECOG performance status, cT stage, and cN stage, to either the experimental or standard of care group. All investigators remained masked for the primary endpoint until a prespecified number of events was reached. Patients allocated to the experimental treatment group received short-course radiotherapy (5 × 5 Gy over a maximum of 8 days) followed by six cycles of CAPOX chemotherapy (capecitabine 1000 mg/m 2 orally twice daily on days 1-14, oxaliplatin 130 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1, and a chemotherapy-free interval between days 15-21) or nine cycles of FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 intravenously on day 1, leucovorin [folinic acid] 200 mg/m 2 intravenously on days 1 and 2, followed by bolus fluorouracil 400 mg/m 2 intravenously and fluorouracil 600 mg/m 2 intravenously for 22 h on days 1 and 2, and a chemotherapy-free interval between days 3-14) followed by total mesorectal excision. Choice of CAPOX or FOLFOX4 was per physician discretion or hospital policy. Patients allocated to the standard of care group received 28 daily fractions of 1·8 Gy up to 50·4 Gy or 25 fractions of 2·0 Gy up to 50·0 Gy (per physician discretion or hospital policy), with concomitant twice-daily oral capecitabine 825 mg/m 2 followed by total mesorectal excision and, if stipulated by hospital policy, adjuvant chemotherapy with eight cycles of CAPOX or 12 cycles of FOLFOX4. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-related treatment failure, defined as the first occurrence of locoregional failure, distant metastasis, new primary colorectal tumour, or treatment-related death, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed by intention to treat. This study is registered with the EudraCT, 2010-023957-12, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01558921, and is now complete., Findings: Between June 21, 2011, and June 2, 2016, 920 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment, of whom 912 were eligible (462 in the experimental group; 450 in the standard of care group). Median follow-up was 4·6 years (IQR 3·5-5·5). At 3 years after randomisation, the cumulative probability of disease-related treatment failure was 23·7% (95% CI 19·8-27·6) in the experimental group versus 30·4% (26·1-34·6) in the standard of care group (hazard ratio 0·75, 95% CI 0·60-0·95; p=0·019). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event during preoperative therapy in both groups was diarrhoea (81 [18%] of 460 patients in the experimental group and 41 [9%] of 441 in the standard of care group) and neurological toxicity during adjuvant chemotherapy in the standard of care group (16 [9%] of 187 patients). Serious adverse events occurred in 177 (38%) of 460 participants in the experimental group and, in the standard of care group, in 87 (34%) of 254 patients without adjuvant chemotherapy and in 64 (34%) of 187 with adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in four participants in the experimental group (one cardiac arrest, one pulmonary embolism, two infectious complications) and in four participants in the standard of care group (one pulmonary embolism, one neutropenic sepsis, one aspiration, one suicide due to severe depression)., Interpretation: The observed decreased probability of disease-related treatment failure in the experimental group is probably indicative of the increased efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy as opposed to adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting. Therefore, the experimental treatment can be considered as a new standard of care in high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer., Funding: Dutch Cancer Foundation, Swedish Cancer Society, Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, and Spanish Clinical Research Network., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The value of adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer is controversial with opinions varying from 'not be used' since randomized trials have not shown significant gains to 'be used as in colon cancer' as the need is the same and colon and rectal cancers are quite similar. This review will look upon data critically and with open eyes., Recent Findings: With the exception of one randomized phase II trial (ADORE) revealing a significant gain in disease-free survival using one more effective regimen (mFOLFOX) than bolus 5-fluorouracil leucovorin, no new data have been presented. However, bringing up aspects in previous trials, either considered irrelevant for the present situation or overall negative, of what adjuvant treatment can achieve, a small reduction (hazard ratio about 0.8) in the risk of recurrence is present. This reduction is not fundamentally different from that in colon cancer considering that adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer cannot be initiated as rapidly as it can after a colon cancer diagnosis., Summary: Adjuvant chemotherapy after rectal cancer surgery reduces recurrence risks but the benefit is limited and for most patients not clinically relevant. Neoadjuvant therapy can be more effective but results from randomized trials are not yet available.

Background: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision is widely accepted as the standard of care for high-risk rectal cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy is advised in several international guidelines, although the survival benefit remains unclear and compliance is poor. The current multidisciplinary approach has led to major improvements in local control, yet the occurrence of distant metastases has not decreased accordingly. The combination of short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and chemotherapy in the waiting period before surgery might have several benefits, including higher compliance, downstaging and better effect of systemic therapy., Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, international multicentre randomized phase III trial. High-risk rectal cancer patients were randomized to SCRT followed by chemotherapy (6 cycles CAPOX or alternatively 9 cycles FOLFOX4) and subsequent surgery, or long-course radiotherapy (25-28 × 2-1.8 Gy) with concomitant capecitabine followed by surgery and optional postoperative chemotherapy (8 cycles CAPOX or 12 cycles FOLFOX4) according to local institutions' policy. The primary endpoint is time to disease-related treatment failure. Here, we report the compliance, toxicity and postoperative complications in both study groups., Findings: Between June 2011 and June 2016, 920 patients were enrolled. Of these, 901 were evaluable (460 in the experimental arm and 441 in the standard arm). All patients in the experimental arm received 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy, and 84% of all patients received at least 75% of the prescribed chemotherapy. In the standard arm, the compliance for CRT was 93% and 58% for postoperative chemotherapy. Toxicity ≥grade 3 occurred in 48% of patients in the experimental arm, compared to 25% of patients in the standard arm during preoperative treatment and 35% of patients during postoperative chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in surgical procedures or postoperative complications were observed., Interpretation: High compliance (84%) of preoperative systemic treatment could be achieved with the experimental approach. Although considerable toxicity was observed during preoperative therapy, this did not lead to differences in surgical procedures or postoperative complications. Longer follow-up time is needed to assess the primary endpoint and related outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Little information is available on the clinical significance of cancer-related genes such as KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and TP53 in nonmetastatic rectal cancer. We investigated mutations of these genes in a large prospective series of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients who were recruited into two phase II trials. Mutational analyses were performed with diagnostically validated methods including polymerase chain reaction, capillary electrophoresis single-strand conformational analysis, Sanger sequencing and next-generation sequencing. Associations between single or multiple gene mutations and clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were explored. Of these 269, 210 (78%) patients were assessable. Mutations of KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and TP53 occurred in 43, 9, 4, 9 and 60% of patients, respectively. Concordance between paired biopsy and resection specimens was 82% for KRAS, 95% for NRAS, 99% for BRAF, 96% for PIK3CA and 63% for TP53. TP53 mutations were associated with extramural venous invasion on baseline MRI (78% vs. 65%, p = 0.04), poor pathological tumour regression (23% vs. 36%, p = 0.05) and a trend toward a worse 5-year progression-free survival (PFS; 60% vs. 74%, HR 1.59, p = 0.06). Patients with tumours harbouring mutation of TP53 and either KRAS or NRAS (32%) had a worse 5-year PFS than those with TP53/KRAS/NRAS wild-type tumours (54% vs. 72%, HR 1.75, p = 0.02). In univariate analysis, BRAF mutation predicted poor 5-year overall survival only among patients treated without cetuximab (20% vs. 73%, HR 3.29, p = 0.03). This is one of the largest biomarker studies in a prospective, largely homogeneous, LARC population. Our findings are hypothesis generating and require validation in independent series., (© 2019 UICC.)

Background: The wide global variation in the definition of the rectum has led to significant inconsistencies in trial recruitment, clinical management, and outcomes. Surgical technique and use of preoperative treatment for a cancer of the rectum and sigmoid colon are radically different and dependent on the local definitions employed by the clinical team. A consensus definition of the rectum is needed to standardise treatment., Methods: The consensus was conducted using the Delphi technique with multidisciplinary colorectal experts from October, 2017 to April, 2018., Results: Eleven different definitions for the rectum were used by participants in the consensus. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was the most frequent modality used to define the rectum (67%), and the preferred modality for 72% of participants. The most agreed consensus landmark (56%) was "the sigmoid take-off," an anatomic, image-based definition of the junction of the mesorectum and mesocolon. In the second round, 81% of participants agreed that the sigmoid take-off as seen on computed tomography or MRI achieved consensus, and that it could be implemented in their institution. Also, 87% were satisfied with the sigmoid take-off as the consensus landmark., Conclusion: An international consensus definition for the rectum is the point of the sigmoid take-off as visualized on imaging. The sigmoid take-off can be identified as the mesocolon elongates as the ventral and horizontal course of the sigmoid on axial and sagittal views respectively on cross-sectional imaging. Routine application of this landmark during multidisciplinary team discussion for all patients will enable greater consistency in tumour localisation.

Background: Pre-operative radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is frequently used prior to rectal cancer surgery to improve local control and survival. The treatment is administered according to guidelines, but these recommendations vary significantly between countries. Based on the stage distribution and risk factors of rectal cancers as determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in an unselected Swedish population, the use of RT/CRT according to 15 selected guidelines is described., Materials and Methods: Selected guidelines from different countries and regions were applied to a well-characterized unselected population-based material of 686 primary non-metastatic rectal cancers staged by MRI. The fraction of patients assigned to surgery alone or surgery following pre-treatment with (C)RT was determined according to the respective guideline. RT/CRT administered to rectal cancer patients for other reasons, for example, for organ preservation or palliation, was not considered., Results: The fraction of patients with a clear recommendation for pre-treatment with (C)RT varied between 38% and 77% according to the different guidelines. In most guidelines, CRT was recommended to all patients who were not operated directly, and, in others, short-course RT was also recommended to patients with intermediate risk tumours. If only non-resectable or difficult to resect tumours were recommended pre-treatment, as stated in many Japanese publications, 9% would receive CRT followed by a delay to surgery., Conclusions: According to most guidelines, well over 50% of primary non-metastatic rectal cancer patients from a general population, in which screening for colorectal cancer is not practised, are recommended treatment with pre-operative/neo-adjuvant therapy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in rectal cancer induces tumour regression with a possible complete response (pCR). The optimal fractionation and timing to surgery is not established. The Stockholm III trial randomly assigned 840 patients to 5 × 5 Gy surgery within one week (SRT), 5 × 5 Gy with surgery after 4-8 weeks, and 2 Gy × 25 with surgery after 4-8 weeks (LRT-delay). The aim of this substudy was to assess tumour regression and correlation to survival., Material and Methods: All available microscopy slides were assessed by one pathologist, blinded to treatment, regarding tumour regression, graded according to the Dworak system (TRG), TNM-stage and other standard histopathology characteristics. Patients' data were collected from the Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry. Outcomes were TRG, pCR-rates, overall survival (OS) and time to recurrence (TTR)., Results: 318, 285 and 94 patients were included in the SRT, SRT-delay and LRT-delay groups. Median follow up was 5.7 years. There were significantly lower tumour stages after SRT-delay. pCR was seen in 1 (0.3%), 29 (10.4%) and 2 (2.2%) patients in SRT, SRT-delay and LRT-delay, respectively. The pCR and Dworak grade 4 were associated with superior survival. pCR vs no-pCR Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) OS: 0.51 (0.26-0.99) p = 0.046, TTR: 0.27 (0.09-0.86) p = 0.027., Conclusion: SRT-delay induces pCR in about 10% of the patients and is in this aspect superior to 25 × 2 Gy. A complete tumour response, TRG 4 using the Dworak system, or a pCR, is associated with superior OS and TTR., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pre-operative radiotherapy (RT) or chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) are sometimes recommended prior to rectal cancer surgery, but guideline recommendations vary. The aim was to describe stage distribution and other important characteristics required for the treatment decision of patients with primary rectal cancers utilizing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in an unselected population., Patients and Methods: All 796 histopathologically verified rectal adenocarcinomas diagnosed 2010-2015 in two counties in Sweden (population 630,000 in 2015) were identified. Staging with pelvic MRI unless contraindications were present, treatment and pathology followed Swedish guidelines., Results: Twenty-three % of cases (n = 186) had distant metastases at diagnosis, demonstrating more advanced tumor and nodal stages when compared with non-metastatic patients (p < 0.001), and they more often displayed MRI-identified mucinous features and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) than non-metastatic tumors (p < 0.001 for both). In non-metastatic patients, 8% displayed clinical stage T1 (cT1), 21% cT2, and 53% cT3; one-third of the latter threatened or involved the mesorectal fascia (MRF+). Almost 20% had stage cT4 (4% cT4a, 14% cT4b) of which 50% were considered "non-resectable". EMVI was seen in 33% of cT3M0 tumors and in 48% of cT4M0 tumors., Conclusions: In an unselected population, approximately 80% of primary rectal cancers are referred to as "locally advanced" (stage II-III, or cT3-4 or N+), meaning that they, according to many international guidelines, are recommended neo-adjuvant treatment. This study provides a detailed description of the clinical stages and presence of characteristics identifiable on MRI which are of importance when assessing the needs for RT/CRT, when using different guidelines., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

The randomized "Nordic" LARC study compared preoperative long-course radiotherapy alone (RT) or with chemotherapy (CRT) in the most locally advanced/ugly rectal cancers. Despite significantly better local control in the CRT group, no overall survival benefit was seen after 10 years follow-up. The relations between local control and survival are discussed., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy improves survival of patients with clinical stage II and III rectal cancer in clinical trials. In this study, we investigated the administration of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (neo-RT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neo-CRT) and its association with survival in resected patients in 2 European countries (The Netherlands and Sweden) and at 3 specialist centers., Materials and Methods: Administration of neoadjuvant treatment (all registries) and overall survival after surgery in The Netherlands and Sweden were assessed. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained using Cox regression adjusted for potential confounders., Results: A total of 16,095 rectal cancer patients with clinical stage II and III were eligible for analyses. Large variations in administration of neo-RT and neo-CRT were observed. Elderly patients less often received neo-RT and neo-CRT. Patients with stage III disease received neo-CRT more frequently than neo-RT. Administration of neo-RT versus surgery without neoadjuvant treatment was significantly associated with improved survival in The Netherlands (HR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.73) as well as in Sweden (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90). Administration of neo-CRT was associated with enhanced survival in The Netherlands (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.50-0.78) but not in Sweden (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.18). The mortality of patients treated with neo-CRT compared with neo-RT showed inconsistent results in population-based centers., Conclusions: Our results support an association of neo-RT with enhanced survival among stage II and III rectal cancer patients. Comparing neo-CRT with neo-RT, larger variations and inconsistent results with respect to survival were observed across centers., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: A population-based cohort and four randomized trials enriched with long-term register data were used to clarify if radiotherapy in combination with rectal cancer surgery is associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Methods: We identified 14,901 rectal cancer patients diagnosed 1995-2009 in Swedish nationwide registers, of whom 9227 were treated with preoperative radiotherapy. Also, we investigated 2675 patients with rectal cancer previously randomized to preoperative radiotherapy or not followed by surgery in trials conducted 1980-1999. Risks of CVD overall and subtypes were estimated based on prospectively recorded hospital visits during relapse-free follow-up using multivariable Cox regression. Maximum follow-up was 18 and 33 years in the register and trials, respectively., Results: We found no association between preoperative radiotherapy and overall CVD risk in the register (Incidence Rate Ratio, IRR = 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.06) or in the pooled trials (IRR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.93-1.24). We noted an increased risk of venous thromboembolism among irradiated patients in both cohorts (IRR register  = 1.41, 95% CI 1.15-2.72; IRR trials  = 1.41, 95% CI 0.97-2.04), that remained during the first 6 months following surgery among patients treated 2006-2009, after the introduction of antithrombotic treatment (IRR 6 months  = 2.30, 95% CI 1.01-5.21). However, the absolute rate difference of venous thromboembolism attributed to RT was low (10 cases per 1000 patients and year)., Discussion: Preoperative radiotherapy did not affect rectal cancer patients' risk of CVD overall. Although an excess risk of short-term venous thromboembolism was noted, the small increase in absolute numbers does not call for general changes in routine prophylactic treatment, but might do so for patients already at high risk of venous thromboembolism., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There are limited data on circulating, cell-free, tumour (ct)DNA analysis in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Digital droplet (dd)PCR was used to investigate KRAS/BRAF mutations in ctDNA from baseline blood samples of 97 LARC patients who were treated with CAPOX followed by chemoradiotherapy, surgery and adjuvant CAPOX ± cetuximab in a randomised phase II trial. KRAS mutation in G12D, G12V or G13D was detected in the ctDNA of 43% and 35% of patients with tumours that were mutant and wild-type for these hotspot mutations, respectively, according to standard PCR-based analyses on tissue. The detection rate in the ctDNA of 10 patients with less common mutations was 50%. In 26 cases ctDNA analysis revealed KRAS mutations that were not previously found in tissue. Twenty-two of these (84.6%) were detected following repeat tissue testing by ddPCR. Overall, the ctDNA detection rate in the KRAS mutant population was 66%. Detection of KRAS mutation in ctDNA failed to predict prognosis or refine patient selection for cetuximab. While this study confirms the feasibility of ctDNA analysis in LARC and the high sensitivity of ddPCR, larger series are needed to better address the role of ctDNA as a prognostic or predictive tool in this setting.

Background: Limited data exist regarding the correlation between MRI tumour regression grade (mrTRG) and pathological TRG (pTRG) in rectal cancer., Methods: mrTRG and pTRG were compared in rectal cancer patients from two phase II trials (EXPERT and EXPERT-C). The agreement between radiologist and pathologist was assessed with the weighted κ test while the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival outcomes., Results: One hundred ninety-one patients were included. Median time from completion of neoadjuvant treatment to pre-operative MRI and surgery was 4.1 weeks (interquartile range (IQR): 3.7-4.7) and 6.6 weeks (IQR: 5.9-7.6), respectively. Fair agreement was found between mrTRG and pTRG when regression was classified according to standard five-tier systems (κ=0.24) or modified three-tier systems (κ=0.25). Sensitivity and specificity of mrTRG 1-2 (complete/good radiological regression) for the prediction of pathological complete response was 74.4% (95% CI: 58.8-86.5) and 62.8% (95% CI: 54.5-70.6), respectively. Survival outcomes of patients with intermediate pathological regression (pTRG 2) were numerically better if complete/good regression was also observed on imaging (mrTRG 1-2) compared to poor regression (mrTRG 3-5) (5-year recurrence-free survival 76.9% vs 65.9%, P=0.18; 5-year overall survival 80.6% vs 68.8%, P=0.22)., Conclusions: The agreement between mrTRG and pTRG is low and mrTRG cannot be used as a surrogate of pTRG. Further studies are warranted to assess the ability of mrTRG to identify pathological complete responders for the adoption of non-operative management strategies and to provide complementary prognostic information to pTRG for better risk-stratification after surgery.

Background: The NORDIC-VII study is a randomised phase III trial of cetuximab plus continuous or intermittent fluorouracil, folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) vs FLOX alone in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. The present report presents an updated and final survival analysis with BRAF and extended RAS mutational status, 5 years after the primary analysis., Methods: A total of 566 patients were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population of the NORDIC-VII study. Updated survival status was obtained from 176 patients who were alive in the primary survival analyses. Samples from 223 tumours previously found to be KRAS (exon 2) and BRAF (V600E) wild-type, were re-analysed for KRAS (exons 3 and 4) and NRAS (exons 2-4) mutations., Results: Including the extended RAS analyses, RAS and BRAF mutational status was available from 457 patients (81% of the ITT population). RAS was mutated in 46% and BRAF in 12% of the tumours. RAS and BRAF, if mutated, were negative prognostic factors. The updated analyses confirmed the finding of the primary report that cetuximab did not provide any additional benefit when added to FLOX in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours, neither on progression-free nor overall survival. However, the outcomes in a subset of patients, which, after the first eight treatment cycles, received cetuximab alone, suggested a beneficial effect of cetuximab monotherapy., Conclusions: Adding cetuximab to Nordic FLOX did not provide any clinical benefit, but the data suggested an effect of cetuximab monotherapy in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours in the NORDIC-VII cohort. The data were compatible with a negative interaction between cetuximab and the Nordic FLOX chemotherapy backbone.

Background: Radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in rectal cancer. However, the optimal radiotherapy fractionation and interval between radiotherapy and surgery is still under debate. We aimed to study recurrence in patients randomised between three different radiotherapy regimens with respect to fractionation and time to surgery., Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, non-blinded, phase 3, non-inferiority trial (Stockholm III), all patients with a biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the rectum, without signs of non-resectability or distant metastases, without severe cardiovascular comorbidity, and planned for an abdominal resection from 18 Swedish hospitals were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned with permuted blocks, stratified by participating centre, to receive either 5 × 5 Gy radiation dose with surgery within 1 week (short-course radiotherapy) or after 4-8 weeks (short-course radiotherapy with delay) or 25 × 2 Gy radiation dose with surgery after 4-8 weeks (long-course radiotherapy with delay). After a protocol amendment, randomisation could include all three treatments or just the two short-course radiotherapy treatments, per hospital preference. The primary endpoint was time to local recurrence calculated from the date of randomisation to the date of local recurrence. Comparisons between treatment groups were deemed non-inferior if the upper limit of a double-sided 90% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) did not exceed 1·7. Patients were analysed according to intention to treat for all endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00904813., Findings: Between Oct 5, 1998, and Jan 31, 2013, 840 patients were recruited and randomised; 385 patients in the three-arm randomisation, of whom 129 patients were randomly assigned to short-course radiotherapy, 128 to short-course radiotherapy with delay, and 128 to long-course radiotherapy with delay, and 455 patients in the two-arm randomisation, of whom 228 were randomly assigned to short-course radiotherapy and 227 to short-course radiotherapy with delay. In patients with any local recurrence, median time from date of randomisation to local recurrence in the pooled short-course radiotherapy comparison was 33·4 months (range 18·2-62·2) in the short-course radiotherapy group and 19·3 months (8·5-39·5) in the short-course radiotherapy with delay group. Median time to local recurrence in the long-course radiotherapy with delay group was 33·3 months (range 17·8-114·3). Cumulative incidence of local recurrence in the whole trial was eight of 357 patients who received short-course radiotherapy, ten of 355 who received short-course radiotherapy with delay, and seven of 128 who received long-course radiotherapy (HR vs short-course radiotherapy: short-course radiotherapy with delay 1·44 [95% CI 0·41-5·11]; long-course radiotherapy with delay 2·24 [0·71-7·10]; p=0·48; both deemed non-inferior). Acute radiation-induced toxicity was recorded in one patient (<1%) of 357 after short-course radiotherapy, 23 (7%) of 355 after short-course radiotherapy with delay, and six (5%) of 128 patients after long-course radiotherapy with delay. Frequency of postoperative complications was similar between all arms when the three-arm randomisation was analysed (65 [50%] of 129 patients in the short-course radiotherapy group; 48 [38%] of 128 patients in the short-course radiotherapy with delay group; 50 [39%] of 128 patients in the long-course radiotherapy with delay group; odds ratio [OR] vs short-course radiotherapy: short-course radiotherapy with delay 0·59 [95% CI 0·36-0·97], long-course radiotherapy with delay 0·63 [0·38-1·04], p=0·075). However, in a pooled analysis of the two short-course radiotherapy regimens, the risk of postoperative complications was significantly lower after short-course radiotherapy with delay than after short-course radiotherapy (144 [53%] of 355 vs 188 [41%] of 357; OR 0·61 [95% CI 0·45-0·83] p=0·001)., Interpretation: Delaying surgery after short-course radiotherapy gives similar oncological results compared with short-course radiotherapy with immediate surgery. Long-course radiotherapy with delay is similar to both short-course radiotherapy regimens, but prolongs the treatment time substantially. Although radiation-induced toxicity was seen after short-course radiotherapy with delay, postoperative complications were significantly reduced compared with short-course radiotherapy. Based on these findings, we suggest that short-course radiotherapy with delay to surgery is a useful alternative to conventional short-course radiotherapy with immediate surgery., Funding: Swedish Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, Stockholm Cancer Society, and the Regional Agreement on Medical Training and Clinical Research in Stockholm., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is often required before rectal cancer surgery to obtain low local recurrence rates or, in locally advanced tumours, to radically remove the tumour. RT/CRT in tumours responding completely can allow an organ-preserving strategy. The time from the end of the RT/CRT to surgery or to the decision not to operate has been prolonged during recent years. After a brief review of the literature, the relevance of the time interval to surgery is discussed depending upon the indication for RT/CRT. In intermediate rectal cancers, where the aim is to decrease local recurrence rates without any need for down-sizing/-staging, short-course RT with immediate surgery is appropriate. In elderly patients at risk for surgical complications, surgery could be delayed 5-8 weeks. If CRT is used, surgery should be performed when the acute radiation reaction has subsided or after 5-6 weeks. In locally advanced tumours, where CRT is indicated, the optimal delay is 6-8 weeks. In patients not tolerating CRT, short-course RT with a 6-8-week delay is an alternative. If organ preservation is a goal, a first evaluation should preferably be carried out after about 6 weeks, with planned surgery for week 8 if the response is inadequate. In case the response is good, a new evaluation should be carried out after about 12 weeks, with a decision to start a 'watch-and-wait' programme or operate. Chemotherapy in the waiting period is an interesting option, and has been the subject of recent trials with promising results.

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II and III rectal cancer patients is a matter of discussion. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of lymphovascular (LVI) and perineural (PNI) invasion in stage II rectal cancer on a national level., Materials and Methods: Clinico-pathological factors associated with disease-free survival (DFS) and time to recurrence in stage II rectal cancer patients were analyzed from patient data registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry between 2006 and 2012., Results: Of 2649 patients with TNM stage II disease, 1395 (53%) received preoperative radiotherapy and 456 (17%) preoperative chemoradiotherapy. LVI and PNI were detected in 387 (15%) and 269 (10%) patients, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was planned in 14%, but more often if LVI or PNI was detected (25% and 31%, respectively, p < .001 for both). The three-year DFS and time to recurrence were 78% and 17%, respectively. Both LVI and PNI indicated worse outcome. In patients not receiving postoperative chemotherapy, the risks of recurrence after three years were 20% if LVI was seen and 22% if PNI was detected (p < .001 for both). In the absence of LVI and PNI, it was 13% and 12%, respectively. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, patients with LVI (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.09-1.90; p = .011) and PNI (hazard ratio 1.80, 95% CI 1.34-2.43, p < .001) had significantly increased risks of recurrence., Conclusions: Stage II rectal cancer patients with LVI and PNI have an increased risk of recurrence which emphasizes the need to properly evaluate the role of adjuvant chemotherapy particularly in these subgroups.

Background and Purpose: Trials in rectal cancer have shown that radiotherapy (RT) decreases local recurrence rates, whereas the effects on survival are uncertain. Swedish and Norwegian oncologists have had different treatment recommendations. The aim was to evaluate local recurrence rates and survival in the two countries., Patients and Methods: Between 1995 and 2012 rectal cancer patients registered in Sweden and Norway were analyzed, presenting population-based "real world" data., Results: Totally 29,029 Swedish and 15,456 Norwegian patients were analyzed. Resection for cure was performed in two-thirds of the patients. RT was given to 49% of Swedish patients, mainly short-course RT and to 26% of Norwegian patients, predominantly chemoradiotherapy (CRT). In Sweden, the proportion irradiated was stable whereas in Norway, an increase from 10% to 40% was seen. Local 5-year recurrence rates were initially higher in Norway (12%) than in Sweden (8%), whereas they were equally low (4%) during the latter time. No survival differences were seen, however, survival improved with time in both countries., Conclusions: Two entirely different approaches to preoperative therapy resulted in similar survival with initially higher local recurrence rates in Norway, but similarly low rates in later years. This raises questions about optimal RT rates and regimens., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.)

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in microRNA genes have been associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, survival and response to treatment. Conflicting results are available on the association between rs4919510, a SNP in mature miR-608 and clinical outcome in CRC. Here, we analyzed the association between rs4919510 and benefit from perioperative treatment in a randomised phase II trial of neoadjuvant Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin (CAPOX) followed by chemo-radiotherapy, surgery and adjuvant CAPOX ± Cetuximab in high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). A total of 155/164 (94.5%) patients were assessable. 95 (61.3%) were homozygous for CC, 55 (35.5%) heterozygous (CG) and 5 (3.2%) homozygous for GG. Median follow-up was 64.9 months. In the CAPOX arm the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 54.6% and 60.7% for CC and 82.0% and 82.1% for CG/GG, respectively (HR PFS 0.13, 95% CI: 0.12-0.83, P = 0.02; HR OS 0.38, 95% CI: 0.14-1.01, P = 0.05). In the CAPOX-C arm PFS and OS were 73.2 and 82.2%, respectively for CC carriers and 64.6 and 73.1% for CG/GG carriers (HR PFS 1.38, 95% CI: 0.61-3.13, P = 0.44; HR OS 1.34, 95% CI: 0.52-3.48, P = 0.55). An interaction was found between study treatment and rs4919510 genotype for both PFS (P = 0.02) and OS (P = 0.07). This is the first study investigating rs4919510 in LARC. The CC genotype appeared to be associated with worse prognosis compared to the CG/GG genotype in patients treated with chemotherapy and chemo-radiotherapy alone. Addition of Cetuximab to chemotherapy and chemo-radiotherapy in CC carriers appeared to improve clinical outcome., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Objective: Intensified preoperative treatments have been increasingly investigated in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), but limited data are available for the impact of these regimens on quality of life (QoL) and bowel function (BF). We assessed these outcome measures in EXPERT-C, a randomized phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant capecitabine combined with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), followed by chemoradiation therapy (CRT), total mesorectal excision, and adjuvant CAPOX with or without cetuximab in magnetic resonance imaging-defined, high-risk LARC., Methods and Materials: QoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. Bowel incontinence was assessed using the modified Fecal Incontinence Severity Index questionnaire., Results: Compared to baseline, QoL scores during preoperative treatment were better for symptoms associated with the primary tumor in the rectum (blood and mucus in stool, constipation, diarrhea, stool frequency, buttock pain) but worse for global health status, role functioning, and symptoms related to the specific safety profile of each treatment modality. During follow-up, improved emotional functioning and lessened anxiety and insomnia were observed, but deterioration of body image, increased urinary incontinence, less sexual interest (men), and increased impotence and dyspareunia were observed. Cetuximab was associated with a deterioration of global health status during neoadjuvant chemotherapy but did not have any long-term detrimental effect. An improvement in bowel continence was observed after preoperative treatment and 3 years after sphincter-sparing surgery., Conclusions: Intensifying neoadjuvant treatment by administering induction systemic chemotherapy before chemoradiation therapy improves tumor-related symptoms and does not appear to have a significantly detrimental effect on QoL and BF, in both the short and the long term., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In this updated analysis of the EXPERT-C trial we show that, in magnetic resonance imaging-defined, high-risk, locally advanced rectal cancer, adding cetuximab to a treatment strategy with neoadjuvant CAPOX followed by chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant CAPOX is not associated with a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in both KRAS/BRAF wild-type and unselected patients. In a retrospective biomarker analysis, TP53 was not prognostic but emerged as an independent predictive biomarker for cetuximab benefit. After a median follow-up of 65.0 months, TP53 wild-type patients (n = 69) who received cetuximab had a statistically significant better PFS (89.3% vs 65.0% at 5 years; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.07 to 0.78; two-sided P = .02 by Cox regression) and OS (92.7% vs 67.5% at 5 years; HR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.70; two-sided P = .02 by Cox regression) than TP53 wild-type patients who were treated in the control arm. An interaction between TP53 status and cetuximab effect was found (P < .05) and remained statistically significant after adjusting for statistically significant prognostic factors and KRAS., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.)

Background: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last 20years; however considerable variation still exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Large variation is also apparent between national guidelines and patterns of cancer care in Europe. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of Cancer Care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012, the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about cancer of the colon and rectum was held. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries., Methods: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. For the Delphi process, multidisciplinary experts were invited to comment and vote three web-based online voting rounds and to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. This manuscript covers all sentences of the consensus document with the result of the voting. The consensus document represents sections on diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and metastatic colorectal disease separately. Moreover, evidence based algorithms for diagnostics and treatment were composed which were also submitted to the Delphi process., Results: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members., Conclusions: Multidisciplinary consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues for colon and rectal cancer management using the Delphi method was successful. This consensus document embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Although rectal and colon cancer management has progressed greatly in the last few decades clinical outcomes still need to be optimized. Furthermore, consensus is required on several issues as some of the main international guidelines provide different recommendations. The European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA) drew up documents to standardize management and care in Europe and aid in decision-making., Material and Methods: In the present section the panel of experts reviews and discusses data from the literature on rectal cancer, focusing on recommendations for selecting between short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and long-course radio-chemotherapy (LCRTCT) as preoperative treatment as well as on the controversies about adjuvant treatment in patients who had received a pre-operative treatment., Results: The starting-point of the present EURECCA document is that adding SCRT or LCRTCT to TME improved loco-regional control but did not increase overall survival in any single trial which, in any case, had improved with the introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) into clinical practice. Moderate consensus was achieved for cT3 anyNM0 disease. In this frame, agreement was reached on either SCRT followed by immediate surgery or LCRTCT with delayed surgery for mesorectal fascia (MRF) negative tumors at presentation. LCRTCT was recommended for tumor shrinkage in MRF+ at presentations but if patients were not candidates for chemotherapy, SCRT with delayed surgery is an option/alternative. LCRTCT was recommended for cT4 anycNM0. SCRT offers the advantages of less acute toxicity and lower costs, and LCRTCT tumor shrinkage and down-staging, with 13-36% pathological complete response (pCR) rates. To improve the efficacy of preoperative treatment both SCRT and LCRTCT have been, or are being, associated with diverse schedules of chemotherapy and even new targeted therapies but without any definitive evidence of benefit. Nowadays, standard treatment is fluoropyrimidine alone since alternative agents and regimens have not been shown to be more active, only more toxic., Conclusions: The EURECCA panel summarized available evidence in an attempt to reduce variance in rectal cancer management. This is expected to benefit patients. Results from ongoing randomized trials will help clarify some of the issues that are still under debate., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.)