Search

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.)

Background: In rectal cancer, watch and wait for patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment has an established evidence base. However, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and management of a near-cCR. This study aimed to compare outcomes in patients who achieved a cCR at first reassessment versus later reassessment., Methods: This registry study included patients from the International Watch & Wait Database. Patients were categorized as having a cCR at first reassessment or at later reassessment (that is near-cCR at first reassessment) based on MRI and endoscopy. Organ preservation, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival rates were calculated. Subgroup analyses were done for near-cCR groups based on the response evaluation according to modality., Results: A total of 1010 patients were identified. At first reassessment, 608 patients had a cCR; 402 had a cCR at later reassessment. Median follow-up was 2.6 years for patients with a cCR at first reassessment and 2.9 years for those with a cCR at later reassessment. The 2-year organ preservation rate was 77.8 (95 per cent c.i. 74.2 to 81.5) and 79.3 (75.1 to 83.7) per cent respectively (P = 0.499). Similarly, no differences were found between groups in distant metastasis-free survival or overall survival rate. Subgroup analyses showed a higher organ preservation rate in the group with a near-cCR categorized exclusively by MRI., Conclusion: Oncological outcomes for patients with a cCR at later reassessment are no worse than those of patients with a cCR at first reassessment., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

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.)

Objective: This study evaluated the nationwide trends in care and accompanied postoperative outcomes for patients with distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer., Summary of Background Data: The introduction of transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive surgery, and neo-adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy changed care for patients with esophageal cancer., Methods: Patients after elective transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma in the Netherlands between 2007-2016 were included. The primary aim was to evaluate trends in both care and postoperative outcomes for the included patients. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after transthoracic and tran-shiatal esophagectomy were compared, stratified by time periods., Results: Among 4712 patients included, 74% had distal esophageal tumors and 87% had adenocarcinomas. Between 2007 and 2016, the proportion of transthoracic esophagectomy increased from 41% to 81%, and neo-adjuvant treatment and minimally invasive esophagectomy increased from 31% to 96%, and from 7% to 80%, respectively. Over this 10-year period, postoperative outcomes improved: postoperative morbidity decreased from 66.6% to 61.8% ( P = 0.001), R0 resection rate increased from 90.0% to 96.5% (P <0.001), median lymph node harvest increased from 15 to 19 ( P <0.001), and median survival increased from 35 to 41 months ( P = 0.027)., Conclusion: In this nationwide cohort, a transition towards more neo-adju-vant treatment, transthoracic esophagectomy and minimally invasive surgery was observed over a 10-year period, accompanied by decreased postoperative morbidity, improved surgical radicality and lymph node harvest, and improved survival., Competing Interests: Luyer received research grants from Galvani and Medtronic. Nieuwenhuijzen reports consulting fees and research grants from Medtronic. Rosman has received research grants from Johnson&Johnson and Medtronic. van Berge Henegouwen reports research grants from Olympus and Stryker, in addition to consulting fees from Medtronic, Alesi Surgical, Johnson&Johnson and Mylan. van Oijen has received unrestricted research grants from Bayer, Lilly, Merck Serono, Nordic, Servier, and Roche. The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to report. No funding was received for this study., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nearly 30% of patients with rectal cancer develop local regrowth after initial clinical complete response managed by watch and wait. These patients might be at higher risk for distant metastases., Objective: This study aimed to investigate risk factors for distant metastases using time-dependent analyses., Design: Data from an international watch and wait database were retrospectively reviewed. Cox regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for worse distant metastases-free survival. Conditional survival modeling was used to investigate the impact of risk factors on the development of distant metastases., Setting: Retrospective, multicenter database., Patients: A total of 793 patients (47 institutions) with rectal cancer and clinical complete response to neoadjuvant treatment from the International Watch & Wait Database were included., Main Outcome Measures: Distant metastases-free survival., Results: Of the 793 patients managed with watch and wait (median follow-up 55.2 mo)' 85 patients (10.7%) had distant metastases. Fifty-one of 85 patients (60%) had local regrowth at any time. Local regrowth was an independent factor associated with worse distant metastases-free survival in the multivariable model. Using conditional estimates, patients with local regrowth without distant metastases for 5 years (from decision to watch and wait) remained at higher risk for development of distant metastases for 1 subsequent year compared to patients without local regrowth (5-year conditional distant metastases-free survival 94.9% vs 98.4%)., Limitations: Lack of information on adjuvant chemotherapy, salvage surgery for local regrowth, and heterogeneity of individual surveillance/follow-up strategies used may have affected results., Conclusions: In patients with clinical complete response managed by watch and wait, development of local regrowth at any time is a risk factor for distant metastases. The risk of distant metastases remains higher for 5 years after development of local regrowth. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C53., El Riesgo De Metstasis a Distancia En Pacientes Con Respuesta Clnica Completa Manejada Por Watch and Wait Despus De La Terapia Neoadyuvante Para El Cncer De Recto La Influencia Del Nuevo Crecimiento Local En La Base De Datos Internacional Watch and Wait: ANTECEDENTES:Casi el 30 % de los pacientes con cáncer de recto desarrollan un nuevo crecimiento local después de la respuesta clínica completa inicial manejada por watch and wait. Estos pacientes podrían tener un mayor riesgo de metástasis a distancia.OBJETIVO:Investigar los factores de riesgo de metástasis a distancia mediante análisis dependientes del tiempo.DISEÑO:Se revisó retrospectivamente los datos de la base de datos internacional de Watch and Wait. Se utilizó el análisis de regresión de Cox para determinar los factores de riesgo de peor sobrevida libre de metástasis a distancia. Se utilizó un modelo de sobrevida condicional para investigar el impacto de los factores de riesgo en el desarrollo de metástasis a distancia. El tiempo transcurrido hasta el evento se calculó utilizando la fecha de decisión para watch and wait y la fecha del nuevo crecimiento local para el diagnóstico de metástasis a distancia.ESCENARIOBase de datos multicéntrica retrospectiva.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron un total de 793 pacientes (47 instituciones) con cáncer de recto y respuesta clínica completa al tratamiento neoadyuvante de la base de datos internacional de Watch and Wait.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Desarrollo de metástasis a distancia.RESULTADOS:De los 793 pacientes tratados con watch and wait (mediana de seguimiento de 55,2 meses), 85 (10,7%) tenían metástasis a distancia. 51 de 85 (60%) tuvieron recrecimiento local en algún momento. El recrecimiento local fue un factor independiente asociado a una peor supervivencia libre de metástasis a distancia en el modelo multivariable. Además, al usar estimaciones condicionales, los pacientes con recrecimiento local sin metástasis a distancia durante 5 años (desde la decisión de watch and wait) permanecieron en mayor riesgo de desarrollar metástasis a distancia durante un año subsiguiente en comparación con los pacientes sin recrecimiento local (sobrevida libre de metástasis a distancia a 5 años: recrecimiento local 94,9% frente a no recrecimiento local 98,4%).LIMITACIONES:La falta de información relacionada con el uso de quimioterapia adyuvante, las características específicas de la cirugía de rescate para el nuevo crecimient o local y la heterogeneidad de las estrategias individuales de vigilancia/seguimiento utilizadas pueden haber afectado los resultados observados.CONCLUSIONES:En pacientes con respuesta clínica completa manejados por Watch and Wait, el desarrollo de recrecimiento local en cualquier momento es un factor de riesgo para metástasis a distancia. El riesgo de metástasis a distancia sigue siendo mayor durante 5 años después del desarrollo de un nuevo crecimiento local. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C53. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio)., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2022.)

Background: Benchmark comparisons in surgery allow identification of gaps in the quality of care provided. The aim of this study was to determine quality thresholds for high (HAR) and low (LAR) anterior resections in colorectal cancer surgery by applying the concept of benchmarking., Methods: This 5-year multinational retrospective study included patients who underwent anterior resection for cancer in 19 high-volume centres on five continents. Benchmarks were defined for 11 relevant postoperative variables at discharge, 3 months, and 6 months (for LAR). Benchmarks were calculated for two separate cohorts: patients without (ideal) and those with (non-ideal) outcome-relevant co-morbidities. Benchmark cut-offs were defined as the 75th percentile of each centre's median value., Results: A total of 3903 patients who underwent HAR and 3726 who had LAR for cancer were analysed. After 3 months' follow-up, the mortality benchmark in HAR for ideal and non-ideal patients was 0.0 versus 3.0 per cent, and in LAR it was 0.0 versus 2.2 per cent. Benchmark results for anastomotic leakage were 5.0 versus 6.9 per cent for HAR, and 13.6 versus 11.8 per cent for LAR. The overall morbidity benchmark in HAR was a Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) score of 8.6 versus 14.7, and that for LAR was CCI® score 11.9 versus 18.3., Conclusion: Regular comparison of individual-surgeon or -unit outcome data against benchmark thresholds may identify gaps in care quality that can improve patient outcome., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: This study investigated the patterns, predictors, and survival of recurrent disease following esophageal cancer surgery., Background: Survival of recurrent esophageal cancer is usually poor, with limited prospects of remission., Methods: This nationwide cohort study included patients with distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma after curatively intended esophagectomy in 2007 to 2016 (follow-up until January 2020). Patients with distant metastases detected during surgery were excluded. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify predictors of recurrent disease. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine the association of recurrence site and treatment intent with postrecurrence survival., Results: Among 4626 patients, 45.1% developed recurrent disease a median of 11 months postoperative, of whom most had solely distant metastases (59.8%). Disease recurrences were most frequently hepatic (26.2%) or pulmonary (25.1%). Factors significantly associated with disease recurrence included young age (≤65 y), male sex, adenocarcinoma, open surgery, transthoracic esophagectomy, nonradical resection, higher T-stage, and tumor positive lymph nodes. Overall, median postrecurrence survival was 4 months [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 3.6-4.4]. After curatively intended recurrence treatment, median survival was 20 months (95% CI: 16.4-23.7). Survival was more favorable after locoregional compared with distant recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65-0.84)., Conclusions: This study provides important prognostic information assisting in the surveillance and counseling of patients after curatively intended esophageal cancer surgery. Nearly half the patients developed recurrent disease, with limited prospects of survival. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with a higher tumor stage, nonradical resection and positive lymph node harvest., Competing Interests: M.D.P.L. received research grants from Galvani and Medtronic. G.A.P.N. reports consulting fees and research grants from Medtronic. C.R. has received research grants from Johnson&Johnson and Medtronic. M.I.v.B.H. reports research grants from Olympus and Stryker, in addition to consulting fees from Medtronic, Alesi Surgical, Johnson&Johnson, and Mylan. M.G.H.v.O. has received unrestricted research grants from Bayer, Lilly, Merck Serono, Nordic, Servier, and Roche. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: With the current advanced data-driven approach to health care, machine learning is gaining more interest. The current study investigates the added value of machine learning to linear regression in predicting anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications after upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery., Methods: All patients in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit undergoing curatively intended esophageal or gastric cancer surgeries from 2011 to 2017 were included. Anastomotic leakage was defined as any clinically or radiologically proven anastomotic leakage. Pulmonary complications entailed: pneumonia, pleural effusion, respiratory failure, pneumothorax, and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Different machine learning models were tested. Nomograms were constructed using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator., Results: Between 2011 and 2017, 4228 patients underwent surgical resection for esophageal cancer, of which 18% developed anastomotic leakage and 30% a pulmonary complication. Of the 2199 patients with surgical resection for gastric cancer, 7% developed anastomotic leakage and 15% a pulmonary complication. In all cases, linear regression had the highest predictive value with the area under the curves varying between 61.9 and 68.0, but the difference with machine learning models did not reach statistical significance., Conclusion: Machine learning models can predict postoperative complications in upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but they do not outperform the current gold standard, linear regression., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Surgical Oncology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: A decade ago, it was demonstrated that the difference in survival between older patients and younger patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) was mainly due to mortality in the first postoperative year. Over the last few years, improvements - especially in perioperative care - have increased survival. The current research investigates whether a survival gap between younger and older patients with CRC still exists on a national level in four European countries., Methods: Population-based data from Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were collected from patients that underwent surgical resection for primary stage I-III CRC between 2007 and 2016. Relative survival and conditional relative survival (CS), with the condition of surviving the first postoperative year, were calculated for colon and rectal cancer separately, stratified for country and age category (<65, 65-75, ≥75 years). In addition, relative excess risk of death (RER) was estimated, and one-year excess mortality was calculated., Results: Data of 206,024 patients were analyzed. In general, compared to patients <65 years, patients ≥75 years had a worse survival during the first year after surgery, which was most pronounced in Belgium (RER colon cancer 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-2.8] and RER rectal cancer 2.6 [95% CI 2.3-2.9]). After surviving the first year, CS was mostly not statistically different between patients <65 years and patients ≥75 years with stage I-II, with the exception of stage II colon cancer in Belgium. However, CS remained worse in the largest part of the patients ≥75 years with stage III colon or rectal cancer (except for rectal cancer in Norway)., Conclusions: Although differences exist between the countries, the survival gap between young and older patients is based mainly on early mortality and remains only for stage III disease after surviving the first year., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Young-onset rectal cancer, in patients less than 50 years, is expected to increase in the coming years. A watch-and-wait strategy is nowadays increasingly practised in patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant treatment. Nevertheless, there may be reluctance to offer organ preservation treatment to young patients owing to a potentially higher oncological risk. This study compared patients aged less than 50 years with those aged 50 years or more to identify possible differences in oncological outcomes of watch and wait., Methods: The study analysed data from patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant therapy in whom surgery was omitted, registered in the retrospective-prospective, multicentre International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD)., Results: In the IWWD, 1552 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 199 (12.8 per cent) were aged less than 50 years. Patients younger than 50 years had a higher T category of disease at diagnosis (P = 0.011). The disease-specific survival rate at 3 years was 98 (95 per cent c.i. 93 to 99) per cent in this group, compared with 97 (95 to 98) per cent in patients aged over 50 years (hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.76 to 3.64; P = 0.199). The cumulative probability of local regrowth at 3 years was 24 (95 per cent c.i. 18 to 31) per cent in patients less than 50 years and 26 (23 to 29) per cent among those aged 50 years or more (HR 1.09, 0.79 to 1.49; P = 0.603). Both groups had a cumulative probability of distant metastases of 10 per cent at 3 years (HR 1.00, 0.62 to 1.62; P = 0.998)., Conclusion: There is no additional oncological risk in young patients compared with their older counterparts when following a watch-and-wait strategy after a cCR. In light of a shared decision-making process, watch and wait should be also be discussed with young patients who have a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Patients undergoing complex gastrointestinal surgery are at high risk of major postoperative complications (e.g., anastomotic leakage, sepsis), classified as Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ IIIa. Identification of preoperative risk factors can lead to the identification of high-risk patients. These risk factors can also be used to design personalized perioperative care. This systematic review focuses on the identification of these factors. The Medline and Embase databases were searched for prospective, retrospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of risk factors on the occurrence of major postoperative complications and/or mortality after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. The level of evidence was graded based on the number of studies reporting a significant association between risk factors and major complications. A total of 207 eligible studies were retrieved, identifying 33 risk factors for major postoperative complications and 13 preoperative laboratory results associated with postoperative complications. The present systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of preoperative risk factors associated with major postoperative complications. A wide range of risk factors are amenable to actions in perioperative care and prehabilitation programs, which may lead to improved outcomes for high-risk patients. Additionally, the knowledge of this study is important for benchmarking surgical outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of 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 Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mortality in the first postoperative year represents an accurate reflection of the perioperative risk after colorectal cancer surgery. This research compares one-year mortality after surgery divided into three age-categories (18-64, 65-74, ≥75 years), focusing on time trends and comparing treatment strategies., Material: Population-based data of all patients diagnosed and treated surgically for stage I-III primary colorectal cancer from 2007 to 2016, were collected from Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Stratified for age-category and stage, treatment was evaluated, and 30-day, one-year and one-year excess mortality were calculated for colon and rectal cancer separately. Results were evaluated over two-year time periods., Results: Data of 206,024 patients were analysed. Postoperative 30-day and one-year mortality reduced significantly over time in all countries and age-categories. Within the oldest age category, in 2015-2016, one-year excess mortality varied from 9% in Belgium to 4% in Sweden for colon cancer and, from 9% in Belgium to 3% in the other countries for rectal cancer. With increasing age, patients were less likely to receive additional therapy besides surgery. In Belgium, colon cancer patients were more often treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). For neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer, patients in Belgium and Norway were mostly treated with chemoradiotherapy. In the Netherlands and Sweden, radiotherapy alone was preferred (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Despite improvement over time in all countries and age-categories, substantial variation exists in one-year postoperative mortality. Differences in one-year excess postoperative mortality could be due to differences in treatment strategies, highlighting the consequences of under- and over-treatment on cancer survival., 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 paperRenu R. Bahadoer, Esther Bastiaannet, Yyvette H.M. Claassen, Marianne van der Mark, Elizabeth van Eycken, Julie Verbeeck, Marianne G. Guren, Hartwig Kørner, Anna Martling, Robert Johansson, Cornelis J.H van de Velde, Jan W.T. Dekker, (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. 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.)

Background: Watch and wait is a novel management strategy in patients with rectal cancer who have a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Surveillance of these patients is generally intensive, because local regrowth (with the potential for salvage) occurs in 25% of patients, and distant metastases occur in 10% of patients. It is unclear for how long these patients should be followed up. To address this issue, we did conditional survival modelling using the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD), which is a large-scale registry of patients with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy who have been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy., Methods: We did a retrospective, multicentre registry study using a dataset from the IWWD, which includes data from 47 clinics across 15 countries. We selected patients (aged ≥18 years) with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and who were subsequently managed by a watch-and-wait strategy between Nov 25, 1991, and Dec 31, 2015. Patients who had not achieved a clinical complete response or who had undergone any surgical procedure were excluded. The criteria used for defining a clinical complete response and the specific surveillance strategies were at the discretion of each participating centre. We used conditional survival modelling to estimate the probability of patients remaining free of local regrowth or distant metastasis for an additional 2 years after sustaining a clinical complete response or being distant metastasis-free for 1, 3, and 5 years from the date of the decision to commence watch and wait. The primary outcomes were conditional local regrowth-free survival at 3 years, and conditional distant metastasis-free survival at 5 years., Findings: We identified 793 patients in the IWWD with clinical complete response who had been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy. Median follow-up was 55·2 months (IQR 36·0-75·6). The probability of remaining free from local regrowth for an additional 2 years if a patient had a sustained clinical complete response for 1 year was 88·1% (95% CI 85·8-90·9), for 3 years was 97·3% (95·2-98·6), and for 5 years was 98·6% (97·6-100·0). The probably of remaining free from distant metastasis for a further 2 years in patients who had a clinical complete response without distant metastasis for 1 year was 93·8% (92·3-95·9), for 3 years was 97·8% (96·6-99·3), and for 5 years was 96·6% (94·0-98·9)., Interpretation: These results suggest that the intensity of active surveillance in patients with rectal cancer managed by a watch-and-wait approach could be reduced if they achieve and maintain a clinical complete response within the first 3 years of starting this approach., Funding: European Registration of Cancer Care, financed by the European Society of Surgical Oncology, the Champalimaud Foundation Lisbon, the Bas Mulder Award, granted by the Alpe d'HuZes Foundation and the Dutch Cancer Society, the European Research Council Advanced Grant, and the National Institute of Health and Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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.)

Aim: In 2014, a national colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme was launched in the Netherlands. It is difficult to assess for the individual patients with CRC whether the oncological benefits of surgery will outweigh the morbidity of the procedure, especially in early lesions. This study compares patient and tumour characteristics between screen-detected and nonscreen-detected patients. Also, we present an overview of treatment options and clinical dilemmas when treating patients with early-stage colorectal disease., Method: Between January 2014 and December 2016, all patients with nonmalignant polyps or CRC who were referred to the Department of Surgery of the Leiden University Medical Centre in the Netherlands were included. Baseline characteristics, type of treatment and short-term outcomes of patients with screen-detected and nonscreen-detected colorectal tumours were compared., Results: A total of 426 patients were included, of whom 240 (56.3%) were identified by screening. Nonscreen-detected patients more often had comorbidity (P = 0.03), the primary tumour was more often located in the rectum (P = 0.001) and there was a higher rate of metastatic disease (P < 0.001). Of 354 surgically treated patients, postoperative adverse events did not significantly differ between the two groups (P = 0.38). Of 46 patients with T1 CRC in the endoscopic resection specimen, 23 underwent surgical resection of whom only 30.4% had residual invasive disease at colectomy., Conclusion: Despite differences in comorbidity, stage and surgical outcome of patients with screen-detected tumours compared to nonscreen-detected tumours were not significantly different. Considering its limited oncological benefits as well as the rate of adverse events, surgery for nonmalignant polyps and T1 CRC should be considered carefully., (Colorectal Disease © 2018 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)