Search

Background Neoadjuvant therapy has an established role in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. However, its role continues to evolve due to both advances in the available treatment modalities, and refinements in the indications for neoadjuvant treatment and subsequent surgery. Methods A narrative review of the most recent relevant literature was conducted. Results Short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have an established role in improving local but not systemic disease control in patients with rectal cancer. Total neoadjuvant therapy offers advantages over short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy, not only in terms of increased local response but also in reducing the risk of systemic relapses. Non-operative management is increasingly preferred to surgery in patients with rectal cancer and clinical complete responses but is still associated with some negative impacts on functional outcomes. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be of some benefit in patients with locally advanced colon cancer with proficient mismatch repair, although patient selection is a major challenge. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with deficient mismatch repair cancers in the colon or rectum is altering the treatment paradigm for these patients. Conclusion Neoadjuvant treatments for patients with colon or rectal cancers continue to evolve, increasing the complexity of decision-making for patients and clinicians alike. This review describes the current guidance and most recent developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 nearcCR 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-operative management of rectal cancer is increasingly being used in selected patients. Most reports include patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) before inclusion into a Watch & Wait (W&W) programme. The aim of this study was to report outcomes from a single-centre W&W programme involving a large cohort of patients. Methods: Patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) with or without chemotherapy, between 2008 and 2020, who showed signs of a clinical complete response (cCR) were reviewed. Patients were assessed using digital rectal examination, flexible endoscopy, carcinoembryonic antigen measurement, MRI, and CT imaging, discussed at the multidisciplinary tumour board meeting, and followed up in a dedicated W&W programme as from 2015. Outcomes including regrowth and 3-year survival (time to regrowth or death) were prospectively evaluated. Results: Of 142 patients who were assessed, 88 fulfilled the criteria for cCR. Treatment before cCR included CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone in 16 (18 per cent), 28 (32 per cent), and 44 (50 per cent) patients, respectively. Patients treated with CRT and SCRT with chemotherapy had more advanced clinical T- and N-stage, compared with patients treated with SCRT alone (clinical T-stage > 2: 81 per cent and 89 per cent versus 47 per cent, respectively; clinical N-stage > 0: 75 per cent and 93 per cent versus 68 per cent, respectively). Overall rate of regrowth was 19 per cent, with 31 per cent, 21 per cent, and 14 per cent following CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone, respectively. Uni- and multivariable analyses evaluating the clinical parameters revealed no statistically significant associations with risk of local regrowth. All but one patient with regrowth underwent salvage surgery. The 3-year survival rate (death with regrowth as competing risk) was 93 per cent, with no significant difference between treatment groups. Conclusion: In this cohort of W&W patients, the vast majority received SCRT with or without chemotherapy and results consistent with previous W&W reports were obtained. No statistically significant differences in terms of regrowth rate were obtained when comparing CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone. SCRT can induce sustained cCR and may precede a W&W strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Previous studies describing the cumulative failure rate after reconstructive surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease have been restricted to specific hospitals, and the generalizability of these results in a population-based setting is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the cumulative failure rate and risk factors for failure after reconstructive surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Methods: The study cohort includes all patients with inflammatory bowel disease in Sweden who underwent colectomy in 2000 through 2013 who were later treated with reconstructive surgery with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis or ileorectal anastomosis. Each patient was followed from admission for reconstructive surgery until admission for failure (a diverting stoma or permanent stoma), date of death, migration or December 31, 2013. Cumulative failure distributions were obtained with the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable Cox regression models were used to calculate the risk of failure. Results: Of the 1809 patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with colectomy and reconstructive surgery, 83% had ulcerative colitis. During follow-up, 270 patients failed, and the cumulative failure rate was 4.1%, 13.2%, and 15.3% after 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The risk of failure was lower after treatment with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis than with ileorectal anastomosis [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.72 (0.56-0.93)]. Gender, hospital volume, and timing of reconstruction were not significantly associated with the risk of failure. Conclusions: The 5-year cumulative failure rate in a nationwide setting was 15.3%, and hospital volume was not associated with the risk of failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]