Search

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.)

Background: The TNM (tumor-node-metastasis) Evaluation Committee of Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and College of American Pathologists (CAP) recommended to prospectively validate the cost-effective and robust tumor-stroma ratio (TSR) as an independent prognostic parameter, since high intratumor stromal percentages have previously predicted poor patient-related outcomes., Patients and Methods: The 'Uniform Noting for International application of Tumor-stroma ratio as Easy Diagnostic tool' (UNITED) study enrolled patients in 27 participating centers in 12 countries worldwide. The TSR, categorized as stroma-high (>50%) or stroma-low (≤50%), was scored through standardized microscopic assessment by certified pathologists, and effect on disease-free survival (DFS) was evaluated with 3-year median follow-up. Secondary endpoints were benefit assessment of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and overall survival (OS)., Results: A total of 1537 patients were included, with 1388 eligible stage II/III patients curatively operated between 2015 and 2021. DFS was significantly shorter in stroma-high (n = 428) than in stroma-low patients (n = 960) (3-year rates 70% versus 83%; P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, TSR remained an independent prognosticator for DFS (P < 0.001, hazard ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.90). As secondary outcome, DFS was also worse in stage II and III stroma-high patients despite adjuvant treatment (3-year rates stage II 73% versus 92% and stage III 66% versus 80%; P = 0.008 and P = 0.011, respectively). In stage II patients not receiving ACT (n = 322), the TSR outperformed the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) criteria in identifying patients at risk of events (event rate 21% versus 9%), with a higher discriminatory 3-year DFS rate (stroma-high 80% versus ASCO high risk 91%). A trend toward worse 5-year OS in stroma-high was noticeable (74% versus 83% stroma-low; P = 0.102)., Conclusion: The multicenter UNITED study unequivocally validates the TSR as an independent prognosticator, confirming worse outcomes in stroma-high patients. The TSR improved current selection criteria for patients at risk of events, and stroma-high patients potentially experienced chemotherapy resistance. TSR implementation in pathology diagnostics and international guidelines is highly recommended as aid in personalized treatment., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the modality used for baseline assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and restaging after neoadjuvant treatment. The overall audited quality of MR imaging in large multicentre trials on rectal cancer is so far not routinely reported., Materials and Methods: We collected MR images obtained within the Rectal Cancer And Pre-operative Induction Therapy Followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial and performed an audit of the technical features of image acquisition. The required MR sequences and slice thickness stated in the RAPIDO protocol were used as a reference., Results: Out of 920 participants of the RAPIDO study, MR investigations of 668 and 623 patients in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, were collected. Of these, 304/668 (45.5%) and 328/623 (52.6%) MR images, respectively, fulfilled the technical quality criteria. The main reason for non-compliance was exceeding slice thickness 238/668, 35.6% in the baseline setting and 162/623, 26.0% in the restaging setting. In 166/668, 24.9% and 168/623, 27.0% MR images in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, one or more of the required pulse sequences were missing., Conclusion: Altogether, 49.0% of the MR images obtained within the RAPIDO trial fulfilled the image acquisition criteria required in the study protocol. High-quality MR imaging should be expected for the appropriate initial treatment and response evaluation of patients with LARC, and efforts should be made to maximise the quality of imaging in clinical trials and in clinical practice., Critical Relevance Statement: This audit highlights the importance of adherence to MR image acquisition criteria for rectal cancer, both in multicentre trials and in daily clinical practice. High-resolution images allow correct staging, treatment stratification and evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment., Key Points: - Complying to MR acquisition guidelines in multicentre trials is challenging. - Neglection on MR acquisition criteria leads to poor staging and treatment. - MR acquisition guidelines should be followed in trials and clinical practice. - Researchers should consider mandatory audits prior to study initiation., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

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.)

Background: Pre-operative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) rather than radiotherapy (RT) has resulted in fewer locoregional recurrences (LRRs), but no decrease in distant metastasis (DM) rate for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). In many countries, patients receive post-operative chemotherapy (pCT) to improve oncological outcomes. We investigated the value of pCT after pre-operative CRT in the RAPIDO trial., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomised between experimental (short-course RT, chemotherapy and surgery) and standard-of-care treatment (CRT, surgery and pCT depending on hospital policy). In this substudy, we compared curatively resected patients from the standard-of-care group who received pCT (pCT+ group) with those who did not (pCT- group). Subsequently, patients from the pCT+ group who received at least 75% of the prescribed chemotherapy cycles (pCT ≥75% group) were compared with patients who did not receive pCT (pCT-/- group). By propensity score stratification (PSS), we adjusted for the following unbalanced confounders: age, clinical extramural vascular invasion, distance to the anal verge, ypT stage, ypN stage, residual tumour, serious adverse event (SAE) and/or readmission within 6 weeks after surgery and SAE related to pre-operative CRT. Cumulative probability of disease-free survival (DFS), DM, LRR and overall survival (OS) was analysed by Cox regression., Results: In total, 396/452 patients had a curative resection. The number of patients in the pCT+, pCT >75%, pCT- and pCT-/- groups was 184, 112, 154 and 149, respectively. The PSS-adjusted analyses for all endpoints demonstrated hazard ratios between approximately 0.7 and 0.8 (pCT+ versus pCT-), and 0.5 and 0.8 (pCT ≥75% versus pCT-/-). However, all 95% confidence intervals included 1., Conclusions: These data suggest a benefit of pCT after pre-operative CRT for patients with high-risk LARC, with approximately 20%-25% improvement in DFS and OS and 20%-25% risk reductions in DM and LRR. Compliance with pCT additionally reduces or improves all endpoints by 10%-20%. However, differences are not statistically significant., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. 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: 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.)

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.)

Background: The discussion on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer patients treated according to current guidelines is still ongoing. A multicentre, randomized phase III trial, PROCTOR-SCRIPT, was conducted to compare adjuvant chemotherapy with observation for rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME)., Patients and Methods: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial recruited patients from 52 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to observation or adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME. Radiotherapy consisted of 5 × 5 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy consisted of 25 × 1.8-2 Gy combined with 5-FU-based chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy consisted of 5-FU/LV (PROCTOR) or eight courses capecitabine (SCRIPT). Randomization was based on permuted blocks of six, stratified according to centre, residual tumour, time between last irradiation and surgery, and preoperative treatment. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: Of 470 enrolled patients, 437 were eligible. The trial closed prematurely because of slow patient accrual. Patients were randomly assigned to observation (n = 221) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 216). After a median follow-up of 5.0 years, 5-year overall survival was 79.2% in the observation group and 80.4% in the chemotherapy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.39; P = 0.73]. The HR for disease-free survival was 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.07; P = 0.13). Five-year cumulative incidence for locoregional recurrences was 7.8% in both groups. Five-year cumulative incidence for distant recurrences was 38.5% and 34.7%, respectively (P = 0.39)., Conclusion: The PROCTOR-SCRIPT trial could not demonstrate a significant benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and TME on overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence rate. However, this trial did not complete planned accrual., Registration Number: Dutch Colorectal Cancer group, CKTO 2003-16, ISRCTN36266738., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)