Search

Introduction: Pelvic exenteration (PE) is now the standard of care for locally advanced (LARC) and locally recurrent (LRRC) rectal cancer. Reports of the significant short-term morbidity and survival advantage conferred by R0 resection are well established. However, longer-term outcomes are rarely addressed. This systematic review focuses on long-term oncosurgical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following PE for rectal cancer., Methods: A systematic review of the PubMed ® , Cochrane Library, MEDLINE ® and Embase ® databases was conducted, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported long-term outcomes following PE for LARC or LRRC. Studies with fewer than 20 patients were excluded., Findings: A total of 25 papers reported outcomes for 5,489 patients. Of these, 4,744 underwent PE for LARC (57.5%) or LRRC (42.5%). R0 resection rates ranged from 23.2% to 98.4% and from 14.9% to 77.8% respectively. The overall morbidity rates were 17.8-87.0%. The median survival ranged from 12.5 to 140.0 months. None of these studies reported functional outcomes and only four studies reported QoL outcomes. Numerous different metrics and timepoints were utilised, with QoL scores frequently returning to baseline by 12 months., Conclusions: This review demonstrates that PE is safe, with a good prospect of R0 resection and acceptable mortality rates in selected patients. Morbidity rates remain high, highlighting the importance of shared decision making with patients. Longer-term oncological outcomes as well as QoL and functional outcomes need to be addressed in future studies. Development of a core outcomes set would facilitate better reporting in this complex and challenging patient group.

Background: Local recurrence of rectal cancer (LRRC) previously treated with radiotherapy is associated with a poor prognosis. Historically, the integration of radiotherapy (RT) with surgery has improved the likelihood of complete resections (R0) and, consequently, enhanced survival. Unfortunately, many LRRC cases are not amenable to surgical intervention. The inclusion of chemotherapy (CHT) alongside advanced RT techniques including proton and carbon ion RT (CIRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), has generated new treatment options. Therefore, there is a need for improved stratification of LRRC patients to enhance treatment outcomes. The RETRY is an integrated trial with the primary aim to explore if combining CHT with RT in all available modalities can enhance local control (LC) in LRRC patients, consequently improving survival., Methods: Experts from Italian centers specializing in rectal cancer and LRRC management collaborated to design a prospective multicenter observational study within the AIRO group for gastrointestinal malignancies. Eligible participants are adult LRRC patients who previously had pelvic RT, meet specific criteria, and are affiliated with the participating Italian centers. Specific criteria must be met for CIRT referral. A total of 88 patients will be enrolled over three years. The primary objective is to determine the 3-year LC rate. Secondary outcomes include assessing survival, quality of life, and R0 resection rates in surgery cases. A minimum dose of 40 Gy, conventional fractionation with concomitant fluoropyrimidine-with/without oxaliplatin-based CHT (CRT) is prescribed in neoadjuvant setting. Alternatively, the dose will vary from 35 to 40 Gy in 5 fractions based on clinical judgment, by SBRT. Both proton and photon therapies will be evaluated in these approaches. Surgery will be considered if deemed operable. In inoperable cases, CIRT with a dose of 40-60 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) will be administered with a daily dose fraction ranging between 3 and 4.8 Gy RBE., Discussion: The RETRY trial aims to investigate the combined effects of RT and CHT and when feasible the addition of surgery, to determine whether this comprehensive approach can result in improved survival and quality of life for LRRC patients. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT05984576)., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: The final protocol received approval from the ethics committee of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli”, IRCCS of Rome, Italy (ethics committee identifier code 5579). Any modification to the protocol that could impact the study execution, potential patient benefit, or safety, such as changes in study objectives, study design, patient population, sample size, study procedures, or significant administrative aspects, will require a formal protocol amendment. This amendment must be endorsed by the Ethics Committee. Patient recruitment will extend to the other affiliated Italian hospitals (“SS Annunziata” Hospital, “G. d’Annunzio” University, Chieti; Responsible Research Hospital, Campobasso; Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria delle Marche, Ancona; CNAO, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia; IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan) and any centres that would like to participate, after approval of the protocol by their respective ethics committees. This study adheres to the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki and complies with Italian laws and regulations. The protocol has been written according to the principles of good clinical practice (GCP). Patients are provided with comprehensive information about the rationale for the treatment, the potential benefits and the possible side effects before they voluntarily sign the informed consent form. No interventions are performed until the informed consent form has been duly signed. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: All authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Locally recurrent rectal cancer is resected with clear margins in only 50% of cases, and these patients achieve a three-year survival rate of 50%. Outcomes and therapeutic strategies for nonresectable locally recurrent rectal cancer have been much less explored. The aim of the study was to assess the three-year progression-free survival and the three-year overall survival in locally recurrent rectal cancer patients treated by chemotherapy/chemoradiation only vs. chemotherapy/chemoradiation and R2 surgical debulking vs. palliative care. A total of 86 patients affected by nonresectable locally recurrent rectal cancer were included: three-year progression-free survival was 15.8% with chemotherapy/chemoradiation vs. 20.3% with R2 surgical debulking (Log-rank p=0.567), but both rates were higher than best palliative care (0.0%, Log-rank p=0.0004). Three-year overall survival rates were respectively 62.0%, 70.8% and 0.0% (Log-rank p<0.0001). Chemotherapy/chemoradiation (HR 0.33, p=0.028) and R2 surgical debulking with or without chemotherapy/chemoradiation (HR 0.23, p=0.005) were independent predictors of improved progression-free survival on multivariate analysis. In conclusion, both chemotherapy/chemoradiation alone and R2 surgery with or without chemotherapy/chemoradiation provide a survival benefit over palliative care in nonresectable locally recurrent rectal cancer. However, considering that pelvic debulking is burdened by a high rate of complications, and considering its negligible impact on progression-free survival and overall survival when associated to medical therapy, surgery should be avoided in this setting., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Local recurrence is common after curative resections of rectal cancer. Surgical resection is considered a primary curative treatment option for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). LRRC often requires a combined resection of other organs, especially in the case of posterior recurrence, which requires a combined resection of the sacrum, making the surgery highly invasive. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the lethal complications in the postoperative period, particularly in the field of pelvic surgery. We found no reports regarding the risks of postoperative VTE in surgery for LRRC, a typical highly invasive procedure in the field of colorectal surgery. This study aims to evaluate the risk of postoperative VTE in surgery for LRRC patients., Methods: From April 2010 to March 2022, a total of 166 patients underwent surgery for LRRC in the pelvic region at our institutions. Clinicopathological background and VTE incidence were compared retrospectively., Results: Among the 166 patients included in the study, 55 patients (33.1%) needed sacral resection. Pharmacological prophylaxis for prevention of VTE was performed in 121 patients (73.3%), and the incidence of VTE was 9.09% (5/55 patients) among those who underwent surgery for LRRC with sacral resection, while it was 1.8% (2/111 patients) in those without sacral resection. In univariate analysis, the combination with sacral resection was identified as a risk factor for VTE in surgery for LRRC (p = 0.047)., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that surgery for LRRC combined with sacral resection could be a significant risk factor for VTE., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) involving the lateral pelvic sidewall requires a complex approach to maximize the likelihood of R0 resection, which is the only predictor of survival. The purpose of this report is to describe a novel technique to resect a localized lateral pelvic sidewall LRRC. A 63-year-old male patient was referred for a 15-mm LRRC near the right internal iliac vessels. Endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging excluded any involvement of the pelvic colon or residual rectum. A combined extraperitoneal antero-lateral approach and gluteal access were used to optimize vascular control on the internal iliac vessels, to promptly identify the ureter and to achieve a better posterior exposition of the sciatic notch. This technique allowed a controlled and tailored resection of pelvic sidewall without entering into the abdominal cavity. The postoperative course was uneventful. The pathologic report confirmed clear margins (R0), with one involving obturator lymph node. At 3 months, the patient is alive and free from local re-relapse. A right lung metastasis has occurred, and it was treated by stereotactic radiotherapy. The present report proposes a novel extraperitoneal pelvic sidewall excision to resect lateral LRRC with a colorectal-sparing approach, thus minimizing the risk of exenterative surgery-related complications. A proper selection of patients is mandatory, as the proposed technique could not be generalized as the standard of care in all lateral LRRCs., (© 2024. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Due to improvements in treatment for primary rectal cancer, the incidence of LRRC has decreased. However, 6-12% of patients will still develop a local recurrence. Treatment of patients with LRRC can be challenging, because of complex and heterogeneous disease presentation and scarce - often low-grade - data steering clinical decisions. Previous consensus guidelines have provided some direction regarding diagnosis and treatment, but no comprehensive guidelines encompassing all aspects of the clinical management of patients with LRRC are available to date. The treatment of LRRC requires a multidisciplinary approach and overarching expertise in all domains. This broad expertise is often limited to specific expert centres, with dedicated multidisciplinary teams treating LRRC. A comprehensive, narrative literature review was performed and used to develop the Dutch National Guideline for management of LRRC, in an attempt to guide decision making for clinicians, regarding the complete clinical pathway from diagnosis to surgery., 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 © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: In the Netherlands, use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer declined after guideline revision in 2014. This decline is thought to affect the clinical nature and treatability of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Therefore, this study compared two national cross-sectional cohorts before and after the guideline revision with the aim to determine the changes in treatment and survival of LRRC patients over time., Methods: Patients who underwent resection of primary rectal cancer in 2011 (n = 2094) and 2016 (n = 2855) from two nationwide cohorts with a 4-year follow up were included. Main outcomes included time to LRRC, synchronous metastases at time of LRRC diagnosis, intention of treatment and 2-year overall survival after LRRC., Results: Use of neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for the primary tumour decreased from 88.5% to 60.0% from 2011 to 2016. The 3-year LRRC rate was not significantly different with 5.1% in 2011 (n = 114, median time to LRRC 16 months) and 6.3% in 2016 (n = 202, median time to LRRC 16 months). Synchronous metastasis rate did not significantly differ (27.2% vs 33.7%, p = 0.257). Treatment intent of the LRRC shifted towards more curative treatment (30.4% vs. 47.0%, p = 0.009). In the curatively treated group, two-year overall survival after LRRC diagnoses increased from 47.5% to 78.7% (p = 0.013)., Conclusion: Primary rectal cancer patients in 2016 were treated less often with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, while LRRC rates remained similar. Those who developed LRRC were more often candidate for curative intent treatment compared to the 2011 cohort, and survival after curative intent treatment also improved substantially., 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 © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) has received attention for the treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer. When the surrounding primary organs are close to the irradiation site, a spacer is required to ensure safe irradiation. This work describes a novel technique using a bioabsorbable polyglycolic acid spacer placed laparoscopically and presents a technical report with five case studies. The short-term surgical outcomes were as follows: mean operating time 235 min with blood loss of 38 mL. CIRT was planned, and the patients underwent irradiation within 2 months of surgery. No pelvic infections occurred, and all procedures were performed safely. Herein, were present a technical report with reference to a video of the surgical procedure., (© 2024 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: In some surgical disciplines, navigation-assisted surgery has become standard of care, but in rectal cancer, indications for navigation and the utility of different technologies remain undetermined., Methods: The NAVI-LARRC prospective study (NCT04512937; IDEAL Stage 2a) evaluated feasibility of navigation in patients with locally advanced primary (LARC) and recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Included patients had advanced tumours with high risk of incomplete (R1/R2) resection, and navigation was considered likely to improve the probability of complete resection (R0). Tumours were classified according to pelvic compartmental involvement, as suggested by the Royal Marsden group. The Brainlab TM navigation platform was used for preoperative segmentation of tumour and pelvic anatomy, and for intraoperative navigation with optical tracking. R0 resection rates, surgeons' experiences, and adherence to the preoperative resection plan were assessed., Results: Seventeen patients with tumours involving the posterior/lateral compartments underwent navigation-assisted procedures. Fifteen patients required abdominosacral resection, and 3 had resection of the sciatic nerve. R0 resection was obtained in 6/8 (75%) LARC and 6/9 (69%) LRRC cases. Preoperative segmentation was time-consuming (median 3.5 h), but intraoperative navigation was accurate. Surgeons reported navigation to be feasible, and adherence to the resection plan was satisfactory., Conclusions: Navigation-assisted surgery using optical tracking was feasible. The preoperative planning was time-consuming, but intraoperative navigation was accurate and resulted in acceptable R0 resection rates. Selected patients are likely to benefit from navigation-assisted surgery., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is used in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) to increase chances of a radical surgical resection. Delineation in LRRC is hampered by complex disease presentation and limited clinical exposure. Within the PelvEx II trial, evaluating the benefit of chemotherapy preceding nCRT for LRRC, a delineation guideline was developed by an expert LRRC team., Materials and Methods: Eight radiation oncologists, from Dutch and Swedish expert centres, participated in two meetings, delineating GTV and CTV in six cases. Regions at-risk for re-recurrence or irradical resection were identified by eleven expert surgeons and one expert radiologist. Target volumes were evaluated multidisciplinary. Inter-observer variation was analysed., Results: Inter-observer variation in delineation of LRRC appeared large. Multidisciplinary evaluation per case is beneficial in determining target volumes. The following consensus regarding target volumes was reached. GTV should encompass all tumour, including extension into OAR if applicable. If the tumour is in fibrosis, GTV should encompass the entire fibrotic area. Only if tumour can clearly be distinguished from fibrosis, GTV may be reduced, as long as the entire fibrotic area is covered by the CTV. CTV is GTV with a 1 cm margin and should encompass all at-risk regions for irradical resection or re-recurrence. CTV should not be adjusted towards other organs. Multifocal recurrences should be encompassed in one CTV. Elective nodal delineation is only advised in radiotherapy-naïve patients., Conclusion: This study provides a first consensus-based delineation guideline for LRRC. Analyses of re-recurrences is needed to understand disease behaviour and to optimize delineation guidelines accordingly., 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 © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) leads to a poor prognosis and appears as a clinically predominant pattern of failure. In this research, whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed on 21 samples from 8 patients to search for the molecular mechanisms of LRRC. The data was analyzed by bioinformatics. Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA) and Human Protein Atlas (HPA) were performed to validate the candidate genes. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect the protein expression of LEF1 and CyclinD1 in LRRC, primary rectal cancer (PRC), and non-recurrent rectal cancer (NRRC) specimens. The results showed that LRRC, PRC, and NRRC had 668, 794, and 190 specific genes, respectively. FGFR1 and MYC have copy number variants (CNVs) in PRC and LRRC, respectively. LRRC specific genes were mainly enriched in positive regulation of transcription from RNA polymerase II promoter, plasma membrane, and ATP binding. The specific signaling pathways of LRRC were Wnt signaling pathway, gap junction, and glucagon signaling pathway, etc. The transcriptional and translational expression levels of genes including NFATC1, PRICKLE1, SOX17, and WNT6 related to Wnt signaling pathway were higher in rectal cancer (READ) tissues than normal rectal tissues. The PRICKLE1 mutation (c.C875T) and WNT6 mutation (c.G629A) were predicted as "D (deleterious)". Expression levels of LEF1 and cytokinin D1 proteins: LRRC > PRC > NRRC > normal rectal tissue. Gene variants in the Wnt signaling pathway may be critical for the development of LRRC. The present study may provide a basis for the prediction of LRRC and the development of new therapeutic drugs.

Aim: Patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC/LRRC) experience higher rates of local recurrence (LR) and poorer overall survival than patients with primary rectal cancer restricted to the mesorectum despite improved neoadjuvant treatment regimens and radical surgical procedures. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) has been suggested as an adjunctive tool in the surgical management of these challenging cases. However, clear evidence regarding the oncological benefit of IORT is sparse. The aim of this review was to update this evidence in the era of standardized neoadjuvant radiotherapy administration., Method: A systematic review of patients who received IORT as part of multimodal treatment for advanced rectal cancer from 2000 to 2020 and an analysis of IORT and surgery/external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) groups was performed. The primary endpoint was the rate of LR between the two groups., Results: Seven papers met the predefined criteria. LR was reduced by the addition of IORT when compared with the surgery/EBRT alone group (14.7% vs. 21.4%; OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.27-1.14; p = 0.11). There was no increase in reported genitourinary morbidity, wound issues, pelvic collections or anastomotic leak in those patients who received IORT. Notably, there was no survival difference between the two groups., Conclusion: The addition of IORT to current treatment strategies in the management of patients with LARC/LRRC is associated with a lower rate of locoregional recurrence without increased morbidity. However, this marks a highly selective group of patients, with heterogeneity regarding indications, prior neoadjuvant treatments and/or IORT dosing., (© 2021 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Aim: Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) frequently present with either synchronous metastases or a history of metastases. This study was conducted to evaluate whether LRRC patients without metastases have a different oncological outcome compared to patients with a history of metastases treated with curative intent or patients with potentially curable synchronous metastases., Method: All consecutive LRRC patients who underwent intentionally curative surgery between 2005 and 2017 in a large tertiary hospital were retrospectively reviewed and categorized as having no metastases, a history of (curatively treated) metastases or synchronous metastases. Patients with unresectable distant metastases were excluded from the analysis., Results: Of the 349 patients who were analysed, 261 (75%) had no metastases, 42 (12%) had a history of metastases and 46 (13%) had synchronous metastases. The 3-year metastasis-free survival was 52%, 33% and 13% in patients without metastases, with a history of metastases, and with synchronous metastases, respectively (P < 0.001) A history of metastases did not influence overall survival (OS), but there was a trend towards a worse OS in patients with synchronous metastases compared with patients without synchronous metastases (hazard ratio 1.43; 95% CI 0.98-2.11)., Conclusion: LRRC patients with a history of curatively treated metastases have an OS comparable to that in patients without metastases and should therefore be treated with curative intent. However, LRRC patients with synchronous metastases have a poor metastasis-free survival and worse OS; in these patients, an individualized treatment approach to observe the behaviour of the disease is recommended., (© 2021 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

A widely adopted classification system for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is currently missing, and the indication for surgery is not standardized. To evaluate all the published classification systems in a large monocentric cohort of LRRC patients, assessing their capability to predict a radical (R0) resection. A total of 152 consecutive LRRC patients treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan (NCIM) from 2009 to 2017 were classified according to Pilipshen, Mayo Clinic, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), Wanebo, Yamada, Boyle, Dutch TME Trial, Royal Marsden and National Cancer Institute of Milan (NCIM) classification systems. Central location of LRRC was significantly predictive of R0 resection across all classification systems. R + resection was predicted by the "anterior" category of MSKCC (OR 2.66, p = 0.007), the "S2b" (OR 3.50, p = 0.04) and the "S3" (OR 2.70, p = 0.01) categories of NCIM, "pelvic disease through anastomosis" of Pilipshen (OR 2.89, p = 0.002), "fixed at 2 sites" of Mayo Clinic (OR 2.68, p = 0.019), and "TR4" of Wanebo (OR 3.39, p = 0.002). The NCIM was the most predictive classification for R0 surgery. The NCIM classification seems to be superior among the others in predicting R0 surgery. Generally, lateral invasive and high sacral invasive relapses are associated with reduced probability of R0 surgery and unfavorable outcomes.

Background: Selection criteria to propose neoadjuvant (re)chemoradiation (CHRT) in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) are required, since re-irradiation is sometimes associated to severe adverse effects. Aim of the present study was to compare chances of R0 surgery and disease-free survival (DFS) in LRRC patients (pts) treated by neoadjuvant (re)CHRT followed by surgery vs. upfront surgery, stratifying pts by each localization of LRRC., Methods: LRRC pts treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan (Italy) were retrospectively divided into two groups: neoadjuvant (re)CHRT vs. upfront surgery. According to our Milan classification, LRRC were categorized as S1, if located centrally (S1a-b) or anteriorly (S1c) within the pelvis; S2, in case of sacral involvement; S3, in case of lateral pelvic wall infiltration., Results: 152 pts were candidate for multimodal treatment: 49 (32.2%) by neoadjuvant (re)CHRT and surgery, including 33 re-irradiations, vs. 103 (67.8%) by upfront surgery. No difference was observed in R0 resection rates (respectively 47.6% vs. 51.0%). However, neoadjuvant (re)CHRT followed by surgery improved the DFS (p = 0.028), also in R1 procedures (p = 0.013), compared with upfront surgery. At multivariate analysis, the R+ surgery (p < 0.0001) strongly predicted unfavorable DFS, while neoadjuvant (re)CHRT followed by surgery was independently associated to better DFS (p = 0.0197). Stratifying by LRRC localization, the combined approach significantly improved DFS in the S1c (p = 0.029) and S2 (p = 0.004) subgroups compared to upfront surgery, but not in S1a-b and S3 pts., Conclusion: Anterior (S1c) and sacral-invasive (S2) pelvic recurrences significantly benefit in terms of DFS by combination of neoadjuvant (re)CHRT and radical surgery, also after R1 resection., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The role of surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) with resectable distant metastases or second LRRC remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the influence of synchronous distant metastases (SDMs), a history of distant metastasis resection (HDMR), and a second LRRC on the outcome., Methods: The long-term outcomes of 70 surgically treated patients with LRRC between 2006 and 2018 were compared by SDM (n = 10), HDMR (n = 17), and second LRRC (n = 7)., Results: Among the 10 patients with SDM, 4 patients underwent simultaneous resection, whereas the other 6 underwent staged resection with distant first approach. Recurrence developed in 9 patients, of which 2 patients with liver re-resection achieved long-term survival without cancer. The patients with and without SDM had equivalent 5-year overall survival rate (40.5% vs. 53.3%, p = 0.519); however, patients with SDM had a worse 3-year recurrence-free survival rate than those without SDM (10.0% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.031). Multivariate analysis showed that primary non-sphincter-preserving surgery, second LRRC, and R1 resection were independent risk factors for overall survival. Similarly, primary non-sphincter-preserving surgery, second LRRC, SDM, and R1 resection were risk factors for recurrence-free survival., Conclusions: Patients with SDM might still be suitable to undergo salvage surgery and achieve favourable overall survival. Distant metastasectomy should be performed first, followed by a sufficient interval to avoid unnecessary LRRC resection in uncurable patients. An HDMR should not be taken into consideration when making surgical plans. Surgical indication of second LRRC should be strict, especially in referred patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A randomized phase III trial was initiated in Japan in August 2019 to confirm the superiority of preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy compared to the standard treatment, i.e. surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy, for locally recurrent rectal cancer in local relapse-free survival. In all, 110 patients from 43 Japanese institutions will be recruited over a period of 6 years. Eligible patients would be registered and randomly assigned to each group with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is local relapse-free survival. The secondary endpoints are overall survival, relapse-free survival, proportion of local relapse, proportion of distant relapse, proportion of patients with pathological R0 resection, response rate of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (preoperative chemoradiotherapy arm), pathological complete response rate (preoperative chemoradiotherapy arm), proportion of patients who completed the protocol treatment, incidence of adverse events (adverse reactions) and quality of life after surgery. This trial has been registered at the Japan Registry of Clinical Trial: jRCTs031190076 [https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs031190076] and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04288999 [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04288999]., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.)

Background and Objectives: Selection of patients affected by pelvic recurrence of rectal cancer (PRRC) who are likely to achieve a R0 resection is mandatory. The aim of this study was to propose a classification for PRRC to predict both radical surgery and disease-free survival (DFS)., Methods: PRRC patients treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan (Italy) were included in the study. PRRC were classified as S1, if located centrally (S1a-S1b) or anteriorly (S1c) within the pelvis; S2, in case of sacral involvement below (S2a) or above (S2b) the second sacral vertebra; S3, in case of lateral pelvic involvement., Results: Of 280 reviewed PRRC patients, 152 (54.3%) were evaluated for curative surgery. The strongest predictor of R+ resection was the S3 category (OR, 6.37; P = .011). Abdominosacral resection (P = .012), anterior exenteration (P = .012) and extended rectal re-excision (P = .003) were predictive of R0 resection. S3 category was highly predictive of poor DFS (HR 2.53; P = .038). DFS was significantly improved after R0 surgery for S1 (P < .0001) and S2 (P = .015) patients but not for S3 cases (P = .525)., Conclusions: The proposed classification allows selection of subjects candidates to curative surgery, emphasizing that lateral pelvic involvement is the main predictor of R+ resection and independently affects the DFS., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after surgery or external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is a serious challenge for which no standard treatment is defined. In the present study, we investigated the feasibility of computed tomography (CT)-guided radioactive 125 I seed (RIS) implantation assisted with three-dimensional printing non-coplanar template (3D-PNCT) in LRRC patients who previously received surgery or EBRT., Methods: Sixty-six patients with LRRC treated by CT-guided RIS implantation in our institute from December 2015 to May 2019 were included. The treatment procedure included: preoperative CT localization, planning design, the printing of 3D individualized template, CT-guided RIS implantation assisted with 3D-PNCT, and postoperative dose evaluation. Therapeutic outcomes including local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively evaluated, as well as side effects., Results: All the patients had previously received surgery or EBRT. The median follow-up time was 12.2 (range, 2.5-35.9) months. The median radioactive activity of a single RIS was 0.6 (range, 0.43-0.72) mCi. The median number of RIS was 60, ranging from 10 to 175. The dosimetric parameters included D90 (140.7 ± 33.1) Gy, D100 (90.3 ± 138.6) Gy, and V100 (91.0 ± 13.3) %. Pain relief was achieved in 85.1% (40/47) of patients. Besides, 9.1% (6/66) of patients had severe side effects (≥grade 3), including perianal skin ulcer in 1 case, fistula, radiation proctitis, and intestinal obstruction each in two cases. Median OS time was 14.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 13.0-16.3) months, and median LC time was 12.2 (95% CI: 9.1-15.2) months. Univariate analysis revealed that when D90 > 130 Gy or D100 > 55 Gy or V100 > 90%, the LC time was remarkably prolonged. However, none of the parameters significantly affected OS., Conclusions: CT-guided RIS implantation assisted with 3D-PNCT is an effective and safe salvage treatment strategy for patients with LRRC after EBRT or surgery. D90, D100, and V100 can be used as prognostic predictors., Trial Registration: NCT03890926 .

Introduction: The majority of patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) present with extensive metastatic disease or an unresectable recurrence, and will be treated palliatively. Only a minority of patients will be eligible for potential cure by surgical treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term outcome of surgical treatment and non-surgical treatment of patients with LRRC., Methods: All patients with LRRC referred to our tertiary institute between 2000 and 2015 were retrospectively analysed. Patients were discussed in a multidisciplinary tumour board (MDT) and eventually received curative surgical or non-surgical treatment. Overall survival (OS) was compared by resection margin status and non-surgical treatment., Results: A total of 447 patients were discussed in our MDT of which 193 patients underwent surgical treatment and 254 patients received non-surgical treatment. Surgically treated patients were significantly younger, received less neoadjuvant therapy for the primary tumour, had less metastasis at diagnosis and more central recurrences. The 5-year OS was 51% for R0-resections and 34% for R1-resections. Although numbers with R2-resections were too small to implicate prognostic significance, there was no difference in 5-year OS between R2-resections and non-surgical treatment (10% vs. 4%, p = 0.282). In a subgroup analysis the OS of R2-patients was even poorer compared to optimal palliative treated patients with combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy (22 vs 29 months, p = 0.413)., Conclusion: R2-resections do not result in a survival benefit compared to non-surgical treatment in this non-randomized series. Patients with a high chance on a R2-resection could be offered non-surgical treatment, without local resection., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The management of patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is often complex and requires multidisciplinary input whereas only few patients are referred to a specialist centre. The aim of this study was to design a regional referral pathway for LRRC, in Nouvelle Aquitaine (South-West, France)., Methods: In 2016, we conducted with a Study Steering Committee (SC) a three phase mixed-methods study including identification of key factors, identification of key stakeholders and Delphi voting consensus. During three rounds of Delphi voting, a consensus was defined as favorable, if at least 80% of participating experts rate the factor, below or equal to 3/10 using a Likert scale, or consider it as "useful" using a binary scale (third round only). Finally, the SC drafted guidelines., Results: Among the 423 physicians involved in 29 regional digestive Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) meeting, 59 participants (from 26 MDT meeting) completed all three rounds of Delphi voting. Thirteen out of twenty initially selected factors reached a favorable consensus. All patients with a LRRC need to be included into a referral pathway. Patients with a central pelvic recurrence offered curative treatment in their local hospital and patients with unresectable metastatic disease were excluded of the referral. Key performance indicators were also agreed including the time to referral and completion of pelvic MRI-, CT-, PET-scan prior to MDT referral., Conclusion: The development of this referral pathway represents an innovative health service, which will improve the management of patients with LRRC in France., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We investigated the efficacy and safety of carbon-ion radiotherapy (C-ion RT) for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC)., Patients and Methods: Data from patients with LRRC treated with C-ion RT from November 2003 to December 2014 at three institutions were retrospectively analyzed. The endpoints of this clinical trial were overall survival (OS), local control (LC), and acute/late toxicity., Results: A total of 224 patients' data were collected. The prescribed dose was 70.4 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]-weighted absorbed dose) or 73.6 Gy (RBE) in 16 fractions. The median follow-up period from the initiation of C-ion RT was 62 months (range 6-169 months). The OS rates were 73% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-79%) at 3 years and 51% (95%CI 44%-58%) at 5 years. The LC rates were 93% (95%CI 88%-96%) at 3 years, and 88% (95%CI 82%-93%) at 5 years. Grade 3 acute toxicity was observed in three patients: gastrointestinal toxicity (n = 1) and pelvic infection (n = 2). Grade 3 late toxicity was observed in 12 patients: skin reaction (n = 2), gastrointestinal toxicity (n = 2), neuropathy (n = 1), and pelvic infection (n = 7). There was no grade 4 or 5 acute or late toxicity., Conclusions: This first multi-institutional analysis of C-ion RT for LRRC indicated relatively favorable outcomes with limited toxicities., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is a radical approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) in case of tumour invasion into the urogenitary tract. The aim of this study is to assess surgical and oncological outcomes of TPE for LARC and LRRC in elderly patients compared to younger patients., Methods: All patients who underwent TPE for LARC and LRRC between January 1990 and March 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients aged <70 years were classified as younger and ≥70 years as elderly patients., Results: In total 126 patients underwent TPE, of whom 88 younger and 38 elderly patients. Elderly patients had a significantly higher number of ASA > II patients (p = 0.01). Indication for surgery LARC (n = 73) and LRRC (n = 53) did not differ significantly. The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher (p = 0.01) in elderly (13%) compared to younger patients (3%). Elderly patients experienced more anastomotic leakage (p = 0.02). Median overall survival (OS) was 75 months [95%CI 37.1; 112.9] for elderly and 45 months [95%CI 22.4; 67.8] for younger patients (p = 0.77). The 5-year OS rate was 44% in both groups. Median disease specific survival (DSS) was 78 months [95%CI 69.1; 86.9] for elderly and 60 months [95%CI 36.6; 83.4] for younger patients (p = 0.34). The 5-year DSS rate was 57% and 49%, respectively., Conclusion: TPE is an invasive treatment for rectal cancer with high 30-day mortality in elderly patients. Oncological outcomes are similar in elderly and younger patients. Therefore, TPE should not be withheld because of high age only, but careful patient selection is needed., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Aim: Although the rate of local recurrence (LR) after colorectal cancer surgery has decreased, it still poses major surgical and oncological challenges. The aims of this study, based on an audit from a tertiary referral centre, was to evaluate determinants associated with outcomes after surgery for pelvic LR and how these have changed over time., Method: Retrospective analysis of all resections for pelvic LR of colorectal cancer performed at the Karolinska University Hospital from January 2003 until August 2009 (period 1) and from September 2009 until November 2013 (period 2) ., Results: Ninety-five patients with pelvic LR were operated on with a curative intent. An R0 resection was achieved in 77% and an R1 resection in 23%. Lateral compartments were invaded in 48% and this proportion increased in resections performed in period 2 (37% vs 60%, P = 0.05). R1 resections were associated with a higher risk of local re-recurrence than R0 resections (64% vs 16%; OR = 8.90, 95% CI: 2.71-29.78). Lateral recurrences were associated with a lower R0-resection rate than nonlateral recurrences (63% vs 90%; OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.64) and a higher risk of treatment failure in terms of local re-recurrence or distant metastases, or death, as first event (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.06-2.75). However, in a multivariate analysis only R1 resections remained a significant prognostic factor for treatment failure (HR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.32-4.27)., Conclusion: The proportion of lateral pelvic recurrences has increased over time. In comparison with non-lateral LRs, lateral LRs are more difficult to resect radically and are associated with worse overall and disease-free survival. However, with radical surgery many patients with pelvic locally recurrent colorectal cancer may be offered curative treatment., (Colorectal Disease © 2017 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Introduction: Previous reports indicated the effectiveness of surgical resection for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Most cases with posterior invasion patterns require concomitant sacrectomy to secure negative histologic margins, although this is a highly invasive procedure. Here, we present a new minimally invasive laparoscopic surgical technique for LRRC with concomitant sacrectomy., Materials and Surgical Technique: A 64-year-old man presented with LRRC on the surface of the sacral bone. He underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with concomitant sacrectomy below the S4 vertebra. The surgical procedure, including sacrectomy, was performed laparoscopically. The distance between the estimated resection line (below the S4 vertebra) and sacral promontory was measured by preoperative imaging. Intraoperatively, a flexible ruler was employed to determine the resection line. Securing adequate space dorsal to the sacral bone was indispensable for placement of the Gigli wire saw. After the Gigli wire saw was positioned, bilateral caudal trocars were used to remove the ends of the wire. Then, the sacral bone was cut by the linear reciprocating motion of the Gigli wire saw. Pathologically confirmed curative resection was achieved. The procedure was successfully performed without transfusion or intraoperative complications. The operation time was 757 min, and blood loss volume was 890 ml. There were no severe postoperative complications. The patient is alive and well with no evidence of recurrence at 58 months after surgical resection of LRRC., Discussion: Our newly developed technique demonstrates that laparoscopic intraperitoneal sacrectomy using a Gigli wire saw is a safe and useful procedure to facilitate resection of LRRC., (© 2018 Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery, Asia Endosurgery Task Force and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background and Purpose: This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of CT guided (125)I-seed implantation (CTII) plus chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) compared with FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC)., Material and Methods: Patients with LRRC who received one prior chemotherapy regimen were enrolled and divided randomly assigned to FOLFORI alone (Arm A) and FOLFORI plus CTII (Arm B). The primary endpoint was local control time (LCT). Overall survival (OS) and treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) were also observed., Results: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled from October 2008 and December 2014. Twenty-seven were assigned into Arm A and 30 into Arm B. The overall response rate of locally recurrent tumor was improved to 100% in Arm B versus 29.6% in Arm A (P<0.001). A significant longer LCT was observed in Arm A (P<0.001); median LCT was 12 months in Arm B versus 4 months in Arm A. A borderline significant improvement in OS was also observed in Arm B (P=0.0464); median OS was 25 months in Arm B versus 19 months in Arm A. For patients without distant metastases, median OS was 37 months in Arm B versus 21 months in Arm A (P=0.0101). For patients with (neo)adjuvant radiotherapy (ART), a longer LCT and OS were also found in Arm B (P<0.001 and P=0.0217, respectively). TRAEs were not serious generally. There was no statistically significant difference in treatment related toxicity between Arm A and B both for all patients and patients receiving ART., Conclusions: CTII plus FOLFIRI improves the LCT with tolerable toxicities as a second-line treatment in patients with local recurrent rectal cancer, and is helpful to prolong the OS, particularly in patients without distant metastases or with a history of radiotherapy., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The standardization of surgical techniques supplemented with appropriate neoadjuvant chemoradiation has led to the decline in local recurrence rates of rectal cancer (LRRC) from 25-50% to 5-10%. The outcomes reported for surgical intervention in LRRC is encouraging, however, a number of controversies exist especially in the ultra-advanced and palliative setting. Incorporating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in this field could supplement traditional clinical endpoints in assessing the effectiveness of surgical intervention in this cohort. This review aimed to identify the HRQOL themes that might be relevant to patients with LRRC. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all studies reporting HRQoL in LRRC. Each study was evaluated with regards to its design and statistical methodology. A meta-synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies was undertaken to identify relevant HRQoL themes. A total of 14 studies were identified, with 501 patients, with 80% of patients undergoing surgery. HRQoL was the primary endpoint in eight studies. Eight themes were identified: physical, psychological and social impact, symptoms, financial and occupational impact, relationships with others, communication with healthcare professionals and sexual function. The impact on HRQoL is multifactorial and wide ranging, with a number of issues identified that are not included in current measures. These issues must be incorporated into the assessment of HRQoL in LRRC through the development of a validated, disease-specific tool., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcome of abdominosacral resections (ASR) in patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer., Methods: From 1994 until 2012 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) underwent a curative ASR and were enrolled in a database. The postoperative complication rates, predictive factors on oncological outcome and survival rates were registered., Results: Seventy-two patients with LRRC (mean age 63; 44 male, 28 female) and 14 patients with LARC (mean age 65; 6 male, 8 female) underwent ASR. R0 resection was achieved in 37 patients with LRRC and 11 patients with LARC. Twenty-seven patients underwent an R1 resection (3 in the LARC group). Eight patients had an R2 resection, compared to no patients in the LARC group. In respectively 26 and 1 patients of the LRRC and LARC groups a grade 3 or 4 complication occurred and the 30-days mortality rate was respectively 3% and 7%. The 5-years overall survival was 28% and 24% respectively., Conclusion: En bloc radical resection remains the primary goal in the treatment of dorsally located (recurrent) rectal cancer. After thorough patient selection, ASR is a safe procedure to perform, shows acceptable morbidity rates and leads to a good oncological outcome., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The literature on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after rectal cancer is growing, however, a comparison between patients with nonadvanced disease (NAD), locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) and a normative population has not been made. Data on the sexual functioning of patient groups is also scarce. We compared (i) the HRQOL of patients with NAD, LARC, or LRRC, with a special focus on sexual functioning and (ii) the HRQOL of the three treatment groups with a normative population. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 were completed by 80 patients with NAD, 292 LARC patients and 67 LRRC patients. The normative population (n = 350) completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Sexual Functioning and Sexual Enjoyment scales of the CR38. LRRC patients reported a lower Physical Function, Social Function, Future Perspective, Sexual Functioning and more Pain compared with LARC and NAD patients. Also, LRRC patients had a worse Body image than NAD patients and a lower Male Sexual Functioning than LARC patients. More than 75% of men and 50% of women were sexually active preoperative, compared with less than 50% and less than 35% postoperative. Male LRRC patients had more problems with erectile or ejaculatory functioning and felt less masculine than NAD or LARC patients. Women did not differ on Lubrication, Dyspareunia and Body Image. About 10% of patients used aids in order to improve erectile functioning (men) or lubrication (women). The treatment groups reported a lower HRQOL and sexual functioning compared with the normative population., (© 2013 UICC.)