Search

Purpose: Organ preservation has become an attractive alternative to surgery (total mesorectal excision [TME]) among patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy who achieve a clinical complete response (cCR). Nearly 30% of these patients will develop local regrowth (LR). Although salvage resection is frequently feasible, there may be an increased risk for development of subsequent distant metastases (DM). The aim of this study is to compare the risk of DM between patients with LR after Watch and Wait (WW) and patients with near-complete pathologic response (nPCR) managed by TME at the time of reassessment of response., Methods: Data from patients enrolled in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD) with cCR managed by WW and subsequent LR were compared with patients managed by TME (with ≤10% cancer cells-nPCR) from the Spanish Rectal Cancer Project (VIKINGO project). The primary end point was DM-free survival at 3 years from decision to WW or TME. The secondary end point was possible risk factors associated with DM., Results: Five hundred and eight patients with LR were compared with 893 patients with near-complete response after TME. Overall, DM rate was significantly higher among LRs (22.8% v 10.2%; P ≤ .001). Independent risk factors for DM included LR ( v TME at reassessment; P = .001), ypT3-4 status ( P = .016), and ypN+ status ( P = .001) at the time of surgery. 3-year DM-free survival was significantly worse for patients with LR (75% v 87%; P = .001). When stratified for pathologic stage, patients with LR did significantly worse through all stages ( P ≤ .009)., Conclusion: Patients with LR appear to have a higher risk for subsequent DM development than patients with nPCR managed by TME at restaging irrespective of final pathology. Leaving the primary undetectable tumor in situ until development of LR may result in worse oncologic outcomes.

Background: A proportion of rectal cancer patients who achieve a clinical complete response may develop local regrowth. Although salvage appears to provide appropriate local control, the risk of distant metastases is less known., Objective: To compare the risk of distant metastases between patients who achieve a clinical complete response (watch-and-wait strategy) and subsequent local regrowth and patients managed by surgery after chemoradiation., Design: Retrospective multicenter cohort study., Settings: This study used data of patients from 3 institutions who were treated between 1993 and 2019., Patients: Patients with initial clinical complete response (after neoadjuvant therapy) followed by local regrowth and patients with near-complete pathological response (≤10%) after straightforward surgery after chemoradiation were included., Main Outcome Measures: Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for distant metastases. Kaplan-Meier curves were created (log-rank test) to compare survival outcomes. Analyses were performed using time zero as last day of radiation therapy or as date of salvage resection in the local regrowth group., Results: Twenty-one of 79 patients with local regrowth developed distant metastases, whereas only 10 of 74 after upfront total mesorectal excision following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy ( p  = 0.04). Local regrowth and final pathology (ypT3-4) were the only independent risk factors associated with distant metastases. When using date of salvage resection as time zero, distant metastases-free survival rates were significantly inferior for patients with local regrowth (70% vs 86%; p  = 0.01)., Limitations: Small number of patients, many neoadjuvant therapies, and selection bias., Conclusions: Patients undergoing watch-and-wait strategy who develop local regrowth are at higher risk for development of distant metastases compared to patients with near-complete pathological response managed by upfront surgery after chemoradiation. See Video Abstract., Nuevo Crecimiento Local Y El Riesgo De Metstasis a Distancia Entre Pacientes Sometidos a Observacin Y Espera Por Cncer De Recto Cul Es El Mejor Grupo De Control Estudio Retrospectivo Muticntrico: ANTECEDENTES:Una proporción de pacientes que logran una respuesta clínica completa pueden desarrollar un nuevo crecimiento local. Si bien el rescate parece proporcionar un control local apropiado, el riesgo de metástasis a distancia es menos conocido.OBJETIVO:Comparar el riesgo de metástasis a distancia entre los pacientes que logran una respuesta clínica completa (estrategia de observación y espera) y el nuevo crecimiento local posterior con los pacientes tratados con cirugía después de la quimiorradiación.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte multicéntrico retrospectivo.CONFIGURACIÓN:Este estudio utilizó datos de pacientes de 3 instituciones que fueron tratados entre 1993 y 2019.PACIENTES:Pacientes con respuesta clínica completa inicial (después de la terapia neoadyuvante) seguida de crecimiento local nuevo y pacientes con respuesta patológica casi completa (≤10 %) después de cirugía directa después de quimiorradiación.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se realizó un análisis univariante/multivariante para identificar los factores de riesgo de metástasis a distancia. Se crearon curvas de Kaplan-Meier (prueba de rango logarítmico) para comparar los resultados de supervivencia. El análisis se realizó utilizando el tiempo cero como último día de radioterapia (1) o como fecha de resección de rescate (2) en el grupo de recrecimiento local.RESULTADOS:Veintiuno de 79 pacientes con recrecimiento local desarrollaron metástasis a distancia, mientras que solo 10 de 74 después de una cirugía sencilla (p = 0,04). El recrecimiento local y la patología final (ypT3-4) fueron los únicos factores de riesgo independientes asociados con las metástasis a distancia. Cuando se utilizó la fecha de la resección de rescate como tiempo cero, las tasas de supervivencia sin metástasis a distancia fueron significativamente inferiores para los pacientes con recrecimiento local (70 frente a 86 %; p = 0,01).LIMITACIONES:Pequeño número de pacientes, muchas terapias neoadyuvantes, sesgo de selección.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes sometidos a observación y espera que desarrollan un nuevo crecimiento local tienen un mayor riesgo de desarrollar metástasis a distancia en comparación con los pacientes con una respuesta patológica casi completa manejados con cirugía por adelantado después de la quimiorradiación. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo )., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2023.)

As watch and wait has become an attractive management alternative among patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation, the focus of organ preservation has now shifted toward the use of this approach in patients with early rectal cancer. These patients would otherwise be treated without the use of neoadjuvant therapy for oncological reasons. The sole purpose of any neoadjuvant treatment here would be the achievement of a complete clinical response in an attempt to avoid total mesorectal excision. This has become particularly interesting after the incorporation of total neoadjuvant therapy regimens. These regimens have resulted in significantly higher rates of complete tumor regression and therefore become an interesting alternative among early rectal cancer patients where organ preservation is desired. The present review provides an overview of the currently available evidence and the preliminary experience with this rather controversial approach., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest B.B.V., G.P.S.J., and R.O.P. have received honoraria from Johnson & Johnson not associated with the present study., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation(nCRT) has been considered the preferred initial treatment strategy for distal rectal cancer. Advantages of this approach include improved local control after radical surgery but also the opportunity for organ preserving strategies (Watch and Wait-WW). Consolidation chemotherapy(cCT) regimens using fluoropyrimidine-based with or without oxalipatin following nCRT have demonstrated to increase complete response and organ preservation rates among these patients. However, the benefit of adding oxaliplatin to cCT compared to fluoropirimidine alone regimens in terms of primary tumor response remains unclear. Since oxalipatin-treatment may be associated with considerable toxicity, it becomes imperative to understand the benefit of its incorporation into standard cCT regimens in terms of primary tumor response. The aim of the present trial is to compare the outcomes of 2 different cCT regimens following nCRT (fluoropyrimidine-alone versus fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin) for patients with distal rectal cancer., Methods: In this multi-centre study, patients with magnetic resonance-defined distal rectal tumors will be randomized on a 1:1 ratio to receive long-course chemoradiation (54 Gy) followed by cCT with fluoropyrimidine alone versus fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin. Magnetic resonance(MR) will be analyzed centrally prior to patient inclusion and randomization. mrT2-3N0-1 tumor located no more than 1 cm above the anorectal ring determined by sagittal views on MR will be eligible for the study. Tumor response will be assessed after 12 weeks from radiotherapy(RT) completion. Patients with clinical complete response (clinical, endoscopic and radiological) may be enrolled in an organ-preservation program(WW). The primary endpoint of this trial is decision to organ-preservation surveillance (WW) at 18 weeks from RT completion. Secondary endpoints are 3-year surgery-free survival, TME-free survival, distant metastases-free survival, local regrowth-free survival and colostomy-free survival., Discussion: Long-course nCRT with cCT is associated with improved complete response rates and may be a very attractive alternative to increase the chances for organ-preservation strategies. Fluoropyrimidine-based cCT with or without oxaliplatin has never been investigated in the setting of a randomized trial to compare clinical response rates and the possibility of organ-preservation. The outcomes of this study may significantly impact clinical practice of patients with distal rectal cancer interested in organ-preservation., Trial Registration: www., Clinicaltrials: gov NCT05000697; registered on August 11 th , 2021., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The administration of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorrectal excision (TME) and selective use of adjuvant chemotherapy can still be considered the standard of care in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, avoiding sequelae of TME and entering a narrow follow-up program of watch and wait (W&W), in select cases that achieve a comparable clinical complete response (cCR) to nCRT, is now very attractive to both patients and clinicians. Many advances based on well-designed studies and long-term data coming from big multicenter cohorts have drawn some important conclusions and warnings regarding this strategy. In order to safely implement W&W, it is important consider proper selection of cases, best treatment options, surveillance strategy and the attitudes towards near complete responses or even tumor regrowth. The present review offers a comprehensive overview of W&W strategy from its origins to the most current literature, from a practical point of view focused on daily clinical practice, without losing sight of the most important future prospects in this area.

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.)

Organ preservation strategies, especially watch and wait, after neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer, have become topics that generate significant interest, for both patients and clinicians. The obvious advantage of these strategies is the avoidance of surgery with its associated risks and functional consequences. Over time, it has become evident that these strategies offer acceptable safety in oncological terms and, in most patients, allows preservation of the rectum without harming patients in terms of distant metastasis or survival. However, there is a small group of patients in whom the tumor returns after an initially diagnosed clinical complete response; patients with local tumor regrowth. The main threat in these patients is not simply local disease, which can be successfully managed in most cases, but the possible effects it may have on distant metastases. The pathophysiology of the phenomenon of local tumor regrowth is not well known and, therefore, strategies to minimize possible impact on survival are not well defined. Our aim is to review key issues in this subgroup that pose a substantial threat to the safety and viability of organ-preserving and watch-and-wait strategies. We also explore possible pathophysiologic explanations and future directions and perspectives that may improve both local and systemic disease control., (© 2022. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

The current standard of care for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer includes neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) followed by total mesorrectal excision (TME). The observation of significant primary tumor response to radiation and chemotherapy led to the idea of organ-preserving strategies in selected patients who achieved clinical, endoscopic and radiological evidence of complete tumor regression. One of these strategies includes no immediate surgery with close surveillance, known as the Watch and Wait strategy (W&W). The potential benefits of this approach with the avoidance of radical TME have to be weighed against the potential risk of local tumor regrowth. Exploration of these advantages and disadvantages will attempt to answer why W&W may be an attractive alternative to rectal cancer patients and their treating physicians. In order to safely implement this strategy, some key issues related to baseline staging, neoadjuvant treatment regimens, timing for tumor response assessment, must be carefully considered. The combination of these features will attempt to clarify "how" and "to whom" the W&W strategy may be considered. Ultimately, in the setting of contemporary neoadjuvant treatment regimens including total neoadjuvant therapy strategies (TNT), the achievement of a clinical complete response is likely to affect a significant proportion of patients. As endoscopic and radiological imaging modalities have evolved and improved, W&W is expected to become an integral part during multidisciplinary management decision. Finally, understanding the clinical consequences of local tumor regrowth both in terms of local and distant relapse may allow for optimal and safe selection of patients fully aware of advantages or disadvantages of this strategy., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In recent decades, rectal cancer management has become increasingly challenging for multiple reasons. Proper imaging using dedicated magnetic resonance, standardization of total mesorectal excision, and incorporation of neoadjuvant treatment regimens have contributed to a significant decrease in local recurrence rates. The observation of complete tumor response to radiation or chemoradiation led to the proposal of organ-preservation strategies with avoidance of immediate surgery and close surveillance (Watch and Wait strategy) in selected patients. The purpose of this article is to review the current evidence related to the selection criteria and outcomes in patients enrolled in this Watch and Wait strategy., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The aim was to describe risk factors for hospital readmission in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal procedures and being discharged in ≤24 h., Method: All consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2019 from a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were included in an enhanced recovery programme. Patients who met criteria for hospital discharge were compared according to the need for readmission in a 45-day follow-up., Results: In all, 664 patients underwent minimally invasive colorectal surgery during the study period and 237 (35.7%) were discharged in ≤24 h. Readmission was required in 16 (6.8%) patients discharged in ≤24 h and no postoperative mortality was observed in this group. Patients discharged in ≤24 h were more likely to have benign disease (P < 0.001), fewer associated procedures (P < 0.025) and intracorporeal anastomoses (P < 0.001). The type of surgical procedure (abdominoperineal resection), low rectal tumour, malignant disease, older age and longer operating time were associated with readmission. Age (OR 1.06; P = 0.037), malignant disease (OR 4.39; P = 0.05) and operating time (OR 1.03; P < 0.001) were identified as independent predictive factors for readmission amongst patients being discharged in ≤24 h., Conclusion: Highly selected patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures in colorectal surgery may be safely discharged within 24 h following the procedure. High-risk features for readmission include older age, malignant disease and longer operating time., (© 2021 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Importance: The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (younger than 50 years) is rising globally, the reasons for which are unclear. It appears to represent a unique disease process with different clinical, pathological, and molecular characteristics compared with late-onset colorectal cancer. Data on oncological outcomes are limited, and sensitivity to conventional neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy regimens appear to be unknown. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available literature on early-onset colorectal cancer., Observations: Within the next decade, it is estimated that 1 in 10 colon cancers and 1 in 4 rectal cancers will be diagnosed in adults younger than 50 years. Potential risk factors include a Westernized diet, obesity, antibiotic usage, and alterations in the gut microbiome. Although genetic predisposition plays a role, most cases are sporadic. The full spectrum of germline and somatic sequence variations implicated remains unknown. Younger patients typically present with descending colonic or rectal cancer, advanced disease stage, and unfavorable histopathological features. Despite being more likely to receive neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, patients with early-onset disease demonstrate comparable oncological outcomes with their older counterparts., Conclusions and Relevance: The clinicopathological features, underlying molecular profiles, and drivers of early-onset colorectal cancer differ from those of late-onset disease. Standardized, age-specific preventive, screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic strategies are required to optimize outcomes.

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.)

The possibility of organ preservation in early rectal cancer has gained popularity during recent years. Patients with early tumor stage and low risk for local recurrence do not usually require neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oncological reasons. However, these patients may be considered for chemoradiation exclusively for the purpose of achieving a complete clinical response and avoid total mesorectal excision. In addition, cT2 tumors may be more likely to develop complete response to neoadjuvant therapy and may constitute ideal candidates for organ-preserving strategies. In the setting where the use of chemoradiation is exclusively used to avoid major surgery, one should consider maximizing tumor response. In this article, we will focus on the rationale, indications, and outcomes of patients with early rectal cancer being treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation to achieve organ preservation by avoiding total mesorectal excision., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None., (© Thieme Medical Publishers.)

Background: Patients with rectal cancer who achieve complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation have been managed nonoperatively. Thirty percent of these patients may develop a local regrowth, and salvage resection with radical surgery is usually recommended. However, selected patients could be offered additional organ preservation by local excision. We hypothesized that patients with baseline T2 who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (for the specific purpose of achieving a complete clinical response) were more likely to harbor recurrent disease at an earlier stage and amenable to organ preservation strategies (local excision) when compared with T3/T4 (undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oncologic reasons)., Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare patients with local regrowth requiring salvage resection according to their baseline stage., Design: This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients with nonmetastatic distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation., Settings: The study included 2 independent tertiary centers with institutional watch-and-wait organ preservation programs., Patients: Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer (cT2-4N1-2M0) managed by watch and wait and local regrowth from 2 institutions were included., Main Outcomes Measures: Final pathologic features and surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared according to baseline staging., Results: A total of 73 of 257 patients experienced local regrowth. cT2 presented similar to ypT, ypN, R0, and abdominal perineal resection rates (p > 0.05) at the time of salvage when compared with cT3 to cT4. Patients with cT2 at baseline were more likely to undergo an organ preservation procedure for salvage (56.2% vs 26.5%; p = 0.03). Overall and disease-free survival after salvage were similar between groups irrespective of the type of surgery for the regrowth., Limitations: Retrospective study, small sample size, and possible inaccurate baseline staging., Conclusions: Although patients with baseline cT2 rectal cancer had similar pathologic stage at the time of recurrence, these patients were more likely to continue an organ preservation pathway after local regrowth through transanal local excision when compared with cT3 to cT4. Despite differences in the use of radical salvage resection, there were no differences in oncologic outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B254. CIRUGÍA DE RESCATE CON PRESERVACIÓN DE ORGANO PARA PACIENTES CON RECIDIVA LOCAL LUEGO DE WATCH & WAIT: ¿SIGUE SIENDO POSIBLE?: Los pacientes con cáncer rectal que logran una respuesta clínica completa luego de la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante han sido tratados de forma no quirúrgica. El treinta por ciento de estos pacientes pueden desarrollar un nuevo crecimiento local y generalmente se recomienda la resección de rescate con cirugía radical. Sin embargo, en pacientes seleccionados se podría ofrecer la posibilidad de preservación de órgano mediante escisión local. Se formuló la hipótesis de que los pacientes con estadio clinico inicial T2 y sometidos a terapia neoadyuvante (con el propósito específico de lograr una respuesta clínica completa) tenían más probabilidades de presentar una recurrencia local en una etapa más temprana y suceptibles de estrategias de preservación de órgano (escisión local) en comparación con T3 / T4 (sometidos a nCRT por razones oncológicas).Comparar los pacientes con recidiva local que requirieron cirugia de rescate de acuerdo con su estadio inicial.Revisión retrospectiva de pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto distal no metastásico sometidos a quimiorradiación neoadyuvante.Dos centros terciarios independientes con programas institucionales de preservación de órgano - Watch & Wait.Pacientes consecutivos con cáncer rectal distal (cT2-4N1-2M0) manejados por Watch & Wait y recidiva local.Las características patológicas finales, los resultados quirúrgicos y oncológicos se compararon de acuerdo con la estadificación inicial.Un total de 73 de 257 pacientes presentaron recidiva local. cT2 presentaron similares ypT, ypN, R0 y tasas de resección abdominoperineal (p>0,05) en el momento del rescate en comparación con cT3-4.Los pacientes con cT2 de base tuvieron más probabilidades de someterse a un procedimiento de preservación de órgano durante el rescate (56,2% frente a 26,5%; p = 0,03). Supervivencia general y DFS después del rescate fueron similares entre los grupos, independientemente del tipo de cirugía para la recidiva.Estudio retrospectivo, tamaño de muestra pequeño, la posible estadificación basal inexacta.Aunque los pacientes con cáncer rectal cT2 de base presentaron estadio patologico similar en el momento de la recidiva, estos pacientes tuvieron más probabilidades de continuar una vía de preservación de órgano luego de una recidiva local a través de la escisión local transanal en comparación con cT3-4. A pesar de las diferencias en el uso de la resección radical de rescate, no hubo diferencias en los resultados oncológicos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B254.

Objective: Analyze conditional recurrence-free survival (cRFS) for rectal cancer patients with complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) managed nonoperatively after each year without recurrence., Summary Background Data: Select patients with cCR after nCRT have been managed nonoperatively. Risk factors for local recurrence, the need for prolonged follow-up, and the risk of recurrence over time are not well defined., Methods: Retrospective review of patients with rectal cancer cT2-4N0-2M0 treated with nCRT. Mean follow-up was 64 months. Patients who achieved cCR were managed nonoperatively. cRFS was used to investigate the evolution of recurrence-odds, as patients remain recurrence-free after completion of nCRT. Three-year cRFS was estimated at "x" years after completion of nCRT based on the formula cRFS3 = RFS(x+3)/RFS(x)., Results: One hundred ninety-seven patients with cCR after nCRT were included. Overall survival and recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 5 years were 81.9% (95% CI 74.0%-87.6%) and 60.4% (95% CI 52.5%-67.4%) respectively. Using cRFS estimates, the probability of remaining disease-free for an additional 3 years if the patient survived without disease at 1, 3, and 5 years, was 77.4% (95% CI 68.8%-83.8%), 91.0% (95% CI 81.9%-95.7%), and 94.3% (95% CI 82.9%-98.2%), respectively. In contrast, actuarial RFS rates for similar intervals were 79.1% (95% CI 72.5%-84.2%), 64.2% (95% CI 56.5%-70.8%), and 60.4% (95% CI 52.5%-67.4%). After 2 years disease-free, 3 year cRFS became similar for T2 and T3 cancers. In contrast, patients undergoing extended nCRT became less likely to develop recurrences only after initial 2 years of successful organ-preservation., Conclusions: Conditional survival suggests that patients have significantly lower risks (≤10%) of developing recurrences after 2 years of achieving cCR following nCRT.

Background: Patients with rectal cancer may undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiation even in early stages in an attempt to achieve complete clinical response and undergo organ preservation. However, prediction of tumor response is unavailable. In this setting, accurate identification of poor responders could spare patients with early stage disease from potentially unnecessary chemoradiation., Objective: This study focused on development/test of a score based on DNA repair gene expression to predict response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with rectal cancer., Design: Pretreatment biopsy samples from patients with rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation were collected and underwent gene expression analysis using RNA-Seq (test cohort). A score was constructed using 8 differentially expressed DNA repair genes between good (complete clinical) and poor responders (incomplete clinical) to treatment. The score was validated in 2 independent cohorts of patients undergoing similar treatment strategies and using quantitative polymerase chain reaction and microarray gene expression data., Settings: This was a retrospective analysis of gene expression data from 3 independent institutions., Patients: Patients with rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation (50.4-54.0 Gy and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were eligible. Patients with complete clinical response, complete pathological response, or ≤10% residual cancer cells were considered good responders. Patients with >10% residual cancer cells were considered poor responders. The test cohort included 25 patients (16 poor responders). Validation cohort 1 included 28 patients (18 poor responders), and validation cohort 2 included 46 patients (22 poor responders)., Main Outcomes Measures: Response was correlated with the DNA repair score calculated using the expression levels of 8 DNA repair genes. DNA repair score sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined in test and validation cohorts., Results: Poor responders had significantly lower DNA repair scores when compared with good responders across all 3 cohorts, regardless of the gene expression platform used. A low score correctly predicted poor response in 93%, 90%, and 71% in test, validation 1, and validation 2 cohorts., Limitations: This study was limited by its small sample size, different gene expression platforms, and treatment regimens across different cohorts used., Conclusions: A DNA repair gene score may predict patients likely to have poor response to chemoradiation. This score may be a relevant tool to be investigated in future studies focused on chemoradiation used in the context of organ preservation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B104. PREDICCIÓN DE RESPUESTA DEFICIENTE A LA RADIO-QUIMIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN PACIENTES CON CÁNCER RECTAL UTILIZANDO UNA PUNTUACIÓN DE DESREGULACIÓN DE REPARACIÓN DE ADN: ESCOGER LOS PERDEDORES EN LUGAR DE LOS GANADORES: Los pacientes con cáncer rectal pueden someterse a radio-quimioterapia neoadyuvante incluso en estadios tempranos en el intento por lograr una respuesta clínica completa y permitir una preservación de órgano. Sin embargo, aun no existen herramientas disponible para la prediccion de la respuesta tumoral al tratamiento. En este contexto, la identificación precisa de los tumores con mala respuesta al tratamiento podría evitar que los pacientes con enfermedad en estadio temprano sean sometidos a radio-quimioterapia potencialmente innecesaria.Desarrollo / testeo de una puntuación basada en la expresión genes reparadores del ADN para predecir la respuesta a la nCRT en pacientes con cáncer rectal.Se recogieron muestras de biopsia de pre-tratamiento de pacientes con cáncer rectal sometidos a radio-quimioterapia neoadyuvante y se les realizó un análisis de expresión génica utilizando RNAseq (cohorte de prueba). Se construyó una puntuación utilizando 8 genes de reparación de ADN expresados diferencialmente entre buenos (respuesta clinica completa) y pobres respondedores (respuesta clinica incompleta) al tratamiento. La puntuación se validó en 2 cohortes independientes de pacientes sometidos a estrategias de tratamiento similares y utilizando qPCR y datos de expresión de genes en chips ADN (biotecnología -microarrays).Análisis retrospectivo de los datos de expresión génica de 3 instituciones independientes.Fueron incluidos aquellos pacientes con cáncer rectal sometidos a radio-quimioterapia neoadyuvante (50,4-54 Gy y quimioterapia basada en 5FU). Los pacientes con respuesta clínica completa, respuesta patológica completa o ≤10% de células cancerosas residuales se consideraron buenos respondedores. Los pacientes con> 10% de células cancerosas residuales se consideraron de respuesta deficiente. La cohorte de prueba incluyó a 25 pacientes (16 respondedores pobres). La cohorte de validación n. ° 1 incluyó a 28 pacientes (18 respondedores pobres) y la cohorte de validación n. ° 2 incluyó a 46 pacientes (22 respondedores pobres).La respuesta se correlacionó con la puntuación de reparación de ADN calculada utilizando los niveles de expresión de 8 genes de reparación de ADN. La sensibilidad del puntaje de reparación del ADN, la especificidad, los valores predictivos positivos y negativos se determinaron en las cohortes de prueba y validación.Los malos respondedores tuvieron puntuaciones de reparación de ADN significativamente más bajas en comparación con los buenos respondedores en las 3 cohortes, independientemente de la plataforma de expresión génica utilizada. Una puntuación baja predijo correctamente una respuesta pobre en el 93%, 90% y 71% en las cohortes de prueba, validación n. ° 1 y validación n. ° 2, respectivamente.Pequeño tamaño de la muestra, diferentes plataformas de expresión génica y regímenes de tratamiento en diferentes cohortes utilizadas.La puntuacion basada en genes de reparación del ADN puede predecir los pacientes con respuesta pobre a la radio-quimioterapia. Esta puntuación puede ser una herramienta relevante para investigar en futuros estudios centrados en la radio-quimioterapia utilizada en el contexto de la preservación de órganos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B104. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo and Dr. Laura Melina Fernandez).

Purpose: Intratumoral genetic heterogeneity (ITGH) is a common feature of solid tumors. However, little is known about the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) in ITGH of rectal tumors that exhibit poor response to nCRT. Here, we examined the impact of nCRT in the mutational profile and ITGH of rectal tumors and its adjacent irradiated normal mucosa in the setting of incomplete response to nCRT. Methods and Materials: To evaluate ITGH in rectal tumors, we analyzed whole-exome sequencing (WES) data from 79 tumors obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We also compared matched peripheral blood cells, irradiated normal rectal mucosa and pre and post-treatment tumor samples (PRE-T and POS-T) from one individual to examine the iatrogenic effects of nCRT. Finally, we performed WES of 7 PRE-T/POST-T matched samples to examine how nCRT affects ITGH. ITGH was assessed by quantifying subclonal mutations within individual tumors using the Mutant-Allele Tumor Heterogeneity score (MATH score). Results: Rectal tumors exhibit remarkable ITGH that is ultimately associated with disease stage (MATH score stage I/II 35.54 vs. stage III/IV 44.39, p = 0.047) and lymph node metastasis (MATH score N0 35.87 vs. N + 45.79, p = 0.026). We also showed that nCRT does not seem to introduce detectable somatic mutations in the irradiated mucosa. Comparison of PRE-T and POST-T matched samples revealed a significant increase in ITGH in 5 out 7 patients and MATH scores were significantly higher after nCRT (median 41.7 vs. 28.8, p = 0.04). Finally, we were able to identify a subset of "enriched mutations" with significant changes in MAFs between PRE-T and POST-T samples. These "enriched mutations" were significantly more frequent in POST-T compared to PRE-T samples (92.9% vs. 7.1% p < 0.00001) and include mutations in genes associated with genetic instability and drug resistance in colorectal cancer, indicating the expansion of tumor cell subpopulations more prone to resist to nCRT. Conclusions: nCRT increases ITGH and may result in the expansion of resistant tumor cell populations in residual tumors. The risk of introducing relevant somatic mutations in the adjacent mucosa is minimal but non-responsive tumors may have potentially worse biological behavior when compared to their untreated counterparts. This was an exploratory study, and due to the limited number of samples analyzed, our results need to be validated in larger cohorts., (Copyright © 2019 Bettoni, Masotti, Corrêa, Donnard, dos Santos, São Julião, Vailati, Habr-Gama, Galante, Perez and Camargo.)

Background: Patients with rectal cancer who achieve complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation have been managed by organ-preserving strategies and acceptable long-term outcomes. Controversy still exists regarding optimal timing for the assessment of tumor response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation., Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate the time interval for achieving complete clinical response using strict endoscopic and clinical criteria after a single neoadjuvant chemoradiation regimen., Design: This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients managed by 54-Gy and consolidation 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Assessment of response was performed at 10 weeks after radiation. Patients with suspected complete clinical response were offered watch-and-wait strategy and reassessment every 6 to 8 weeks until achievement of strict criteria of complete clinical response or overt residual cancer., Settings: This study was conducted at a single tertiary care center., Patients: Patients with complete clinical response who underwent a successful watch-and-wait strategy until last follow-up were eligible. Dates of radiation completion and achievement of strict endoscopic and clinical criteria (mucosal whitening, teleangiectasia, and no ulceration or irregularity) were recorded. Patients with incomplete response or with initial complete clinical response followed by local recurrence or regrowth were excluded., Main Outcomes Measures: The distribution of time intervals between completion of radiation and achievement of strict complete clinical response was measured. Patients who achieved early complete clinical response (≤16 wk) were compared with late complete clinical response (>16 wk)., Results: A total of 49 patients achieved complete clinical response and were successfully managed nonoperatively. A median interval of 18.7 weeks was observed for achieving strict complete clinical response. Only 38% of patients achieved complete clinical response between 10 and 16 weeks from radiation completion. Patients with earlier cT status (cT2/T3a) achieved a complete clinical response significantly earlier when compared with those patients with more advanced disease (T3b-d/4; 19 vs 26 wk; p = 0.03)., Limitations: This was a retrospective study with a small sample size., Conclusions: Assessment at 10 to 16 weeks may detect a minority of patients who achieve complete clinical response without additional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Patients suspected for a complete clinical response should be considered for reassessment beyond 16 weeks before definitive management when considered for a watch and wait strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A901.

Background: Select patients with complete clinical response to chemoradiation have been managed without radical surgery. The presence of radiologic evidence of nodal metastases at baseline could be a risk factor for local tumor regrowth, more advanced stage at the time of recurrence, and worse distant metastases-free survival., Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients with baseline node-positive and node-negative cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and complete clinical response managed nonoperatively., Design: This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients with nonmetastatic distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation., Patients: Consecutive patients with clinical and radiologic evidence of complete clinical response at 8 to 10 weeks were managed nonoperatively and enrolled in a strict follow-up program (watch and wait). Patients with incomplete clinical response or tumor regrowth after initial complete clinical response were referred to surgery., Main Outcomes Measures: Surgery-free and distant metastases-free survival were compared between patients according to nodal status at baseline., Results: A total of 117 patients with node-positive and 218 with node-negative cancer at baseline were reviewed. Overall, 62 (53.0%; node positive) and 135 (61.9%; node negative) achieved a complete clinical response and were managed nonoperatively (p = 0.13). Patients with baseline node-positive cancer had similar rates of pathologic nodal metastases at the time of recurrence. Five-year surgery-free (39.7% vs 46.8%; p = 0.2) and distant metastases-free survival (77.5% vs 80.5%; p = 0.49) were similar between baseline node-positive and node-negative patients., Limitations: This was a retrospective study with a small sample size and possible inaccurate nodal staging., Conclusions: Patients with rectal cancer with node-positive cancer at baseline who develop a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation are not at increased risk for local tumor regrowth or development of more advanced disease at the time of recurrence. These patients seem to be safe candidates for organ-preserving strategies after achieving complete clinical response. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A902.

Objective: To demonstrate the difference in organ-preservation rates and avoidance of definitive surgery among cT2N0 rectal cancer patients undergoing 2 different chemoradiation (CRT) regimens., Background: Patients with cT2N0 rectal cancer are more likely to develop complete response to neoadjuvant CRT. Organ preservation has been considered an alternative treatment strategy for selected patients. Radiation dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy have been associated with increased rates of response and may improve chances of organ preservation among these patients., Methods: Patients with distal and nonmetastatic cT2N0 rectal cancer managed by neoadjuvant CRT were retrospectively reviewed. Patients undergoing standard CRT (50.4 Gy and 2 cycles of 5-FU-based chemotherapy) were compared with those undergoing extended CRT (54 Gy and 6 cycles of 5-FU-based chemotherapy). Patients were assessed for tumor response at 8 to 10 weeks. Patients with complete clinical response (cCR) underwent organ-preservation strategy ("Watch and Wait"). Patients were referred to salvage surgery in the event of local recurrence during follow-up., Results: Thirty-five patients underwent standard and 46 patients extended CRT. Patients undergoing extended CRT were more likely to undergo organ preservation and avoid definitive surgical resection at 5years (67% vs 30%; P = 0.001). After development of a cCR, surgery-free survival is similar between extended and standard CRT groups at 5 years (78% vs 56%; P = 0.12)., Conclusions: Dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy leads to increased long-term organ-preservation rates among cT2N0 rectal cancer. After achievement of a cCR, the risk for local recurrence and need for salvage surgery is similar, irrespective of the CRT regimen.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological and survival outcomes of a Watch and Wait policy in rectal cancer after a clinical complete response (cCR) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy., Background: The detection of a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment may facilitate a nonoperative approach in selected patients. However, the long-term safety of this strategy remains to be validated., Method: This is a systematic review of the literature to determine the oncological outcomes in Watch and Wait patients. The primary outcome was the cumulative rate of local regrowth, success of salvage surgery, and incidence of metastases. We also evaluated survival outcomes. A pooled analysis of manually extracted summary statistics from individual studies was carried out using inverse variance weighting., Results: Seventeen studies comprising 692 patients were identified; incidence of cCR was 22.4% [95% confidence interval (CI),14.3-31.8]. There were 153 (22.1%) local regrowths, of which 96% (n = 147/153) manifested in the first 3 years of surveillance. The 3-year cumulative risk of local regrowth was 21.6% (95% CI, 16.0-27.8). Salvage surgery was performed in 88% of patients, of which 121 (93%) had a complete (R0) resection. Fifty-seven metastases (8.2%) were detected, and 35 (60%) were isolated without evidence of synchronous regrowths; 3-year incidence was 6.8% (95% CI, 4.1-10.2). The 3-year overall survival was 93.5% (95% CI, 90.2-96.2)., Conclusion: In rectal cancer patients with a cCR following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, a Watch and Wait policy appears feasible and safe. Robust surveillance with early detection of regrowths allows a high rate of successful salvage surgery, without an increase in the risk of systemic disease, or adverse survival outcomes.

Objective: To estimate the improvement in surgical exposure by removal of the coccyx, during abdomino-perineal resection (APR), in rectal cancer patients., Methods: Retrospective study of 29 consecutive patients with rectal cancer was carried out. Using MR T2 sagittal series, the solid angle was estimated using the angle determined by the anterior resection margin and the tip of coccyx (no coccyx resection) or the tip of last sacral vertebra (coccyx resection). The solid angle provides an estimate of the tridimensional surface area provided by an original angle resulting in the best estimate of the surgeon's view/exposure to the critical dissecting point of choice (anterior rectal wall). The difference ("Gain") in surgical field exposure by removal of the coccyx was compared by the solid angle variation between the two estimates (with and without the coccyx)., Results: Routine removal of the coccyx determines an average 42% (95% CI 27-57%) gain in surgical field exposure area facing the anterior rectal wall at the level of the prostate/vagina by the surgeon. Fifteen (51%) patients had ≥30% (median) estimated gain in surgical field exposure by coccygectomy. There was no association between BMI, age or gender and estimated gain in surgical field exposure area., Conclusions: Routine removal of the coccyx during APR may result in an average increase in 42% in surgical field exposure during APR's perineal dissection. Precise estimation of surgical field exposure gain by removal of the coccyx may be predicted by MR sagittal series for each individual patient.

Introduction: Lateral node dissection in rectal cancer has been routinely performed in Eastern countries. Technical and anatomical challenges and potential significant postoperative morbidity associated with the procedure have prevented its implementation into clinical practice in Western countries. However, the minimally invasive approach may offer the opportunity of performing this complex procedure with precise anatomical dissection and minimal intraoperative blood loss. In this setting, proper training and standardization of technical steps is highly warranted for surgeons not fully acquainted with the procedure., Technique: Access to the lateral nodes along the obturator and internal iliac vessels is described by using specific anatomical landmarks. Opening of the peritoneum along the ureter provides access to the region of interest. Dissection of the medial limit is performed preserving the neurovascular bundle and ureter. The lateral dissection is performed along the external iliac vein to provide access to the obturator muscle. Identification of the obturator nerve with blunt dissection of the fat is a critical part of the procedure. Once the lymphatic connections between the inguinal and iliac nodes are transected, dissection is performed along the internal iliac vessels, and branches are separated from the lymphadenectomy specimen., Results: Evidence supports that lateral node dissection performed for highly selected patients with minimally invasive access leads to less intraoperative blood loss and similar oncological outcomes. Technical steps illustrated in the present video may aid surgeons in performing this procedure with precise anatomical landmarks and minimal risk for intraoperative complications., Conclusions: Lateral node dissection for rectal cancer is a procedure that may follow standardized technical steps by using precise anatomical landmarks with the use of minimally invasive approach.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is one of the preferred initial treatment strategies for locally advanced rectal cancer. Responses are variable, and most patients still require surgery. The aim of this study was to identify molecular mechanisms determining poor response to CRT., Methods: Global gene expression and pathway enrichment were assessed in pretreatment biopsies from patients with non-metastatic cT2-4 N0-2 rectal cancer within 7 cm of the anal verge. Downstream Akt activation was assessed in an independent set of pretreatment biopsies and in colorectal cancer cell lines using immunohistochemistry and western blot respectively. The radiosensitizing effects of the Akt inhibitor MK2206 were assessed using clonogenic assays and xenografts in immunodeficient mice., Results: A total of 350 differentially expressed genes were identified, of which 123 were upregulated and 199 downregulated in tumours from poor responders. Mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (P < 0·001) and phosphatidylinositol signalling pathways (P < 0·050) were identified as significantly enriched pathways among the set of differentially expressed genes. Deregulation of both pathways is known to result in Akt activation, and high immunoexpression of phosphorylated Akt S473 was observed among patients with a poor histological response (tumour regression grade 0-2) to CRT (75 per cent versus 48 per cent in those with a good or complete response; P = 0·016). Akt activation was also confirmed in the radioresistant cell line SW480, and a 50 per cent improvement in sensitivity to CRT was observed in vitro and in vivo when SW480 cells were exposed to the Akt inhibitor MK2206 in combination with radiation and 5-fluorouracil., Conclusion: Akt activation is a key event in the response to CRT. Pharmacological inhibition of Akt activation may enhance the effects of CRT. Surgical relevance Organ preservation is an attractive alternative in rectal cancer management following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) to avoid the morbidity of radical surgery. Molecular steps associated with tumour response to CRT may provide a useful tool for the identification of patients who are candidates for no immediate surgery. In this study, tumours resistant to CRT were more likely to have activation of specific genetic pathways that result in phosphorylated Akt (pAkt) activation. Pretreatment biopsy tissues with high immunoexpression of pAkt were more likely to exhibit a poor histological response to CRT. In addition, the introduction of a pAkt inhibitor to cancer cell lines in vitro and in vivo led to a significant improvement in sensitivity to CRT. Identification of pAkt-activated tumours may thus allow the identification of poor responders to CRT. In addition, the concomitant use of pAkt inhibitors to increase sensitivity to CRT in patients with rectal cancer may constitute an interesting strategy for increasing the chance of a complete response to treatment and organ preservation., (© 2018 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Patients with cT3 rectal cancer are less likely to develop complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) and still face significant risk for systemic relapse. In this setting, radiation (RT) dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy in "extended" nCRT regimens have been suggested to improve primary tumor response and decrease the risks of systemic recurrences. For these reasons we compared surgery-free and distant-metastases free survival among cT3 patients undergoing standard or extended nCRT., Methods: Patients with distal and non-metastatic T3 rectal cancer managed by nCRT were retrospectively reviewed. Patients undergoing standard CRT (50.4 Gy and 2 cycles of 5FU-based chemotherapy) were compared to those undergoing extended CRT (54 Gy and 6 cycles of 5FU-based chemotherapy). Patients were assessed for tumor response at 8-10 weeks. Patients with complete clinical response (cCR) underwent organ-preservation strategy (Watch & Wait). Patients were referred to salvage surgery in the event of local recurrence during follow-up. Cox's logistic regression was performed to identify independent features associated with improved surgery-free survival after cCR and distant-metastases-free survival., Results: 155 patients underwent standard and 66 patients extended CRT. Patients undergoing extended CRT were more likely to harbor larger initial tumor size (p = 0.04), baseline nodal metastases (cN+; p < 0.001) and higher tumor location (p = 0.02). Cox-regression analysis revealed that the type of nCRT regimen was not independently associated with distinct surgery-free survival after cCR or distant-metastases-free survival (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: Dose-escalation and consolidation chemotherapy are insufficient to increase long-term surgery-free survival among cT3 rectal cancer patients and provides no advantage in distant metastases-free survival., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Radical surgery is considered as the standard treatment for rectal cancer. Transanal local excision has been considered an interesting alternative for the management of selected patients with rectal cancers for many decades. Different approaches had been considered for local excision, from endoscopic submucosal dissection to resections using platforms, such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or transanal minimally invasive surgery. Identifying the ideal candidate for this approach is crucial, as a local failure after local excision is associated with poor outcomes, even for an initial early rectal tumor. In this article, the diagnostic tools and criteria to select patients for local excision, the different modalities used, and the outcomes are discussed.

Organ preservation is considered in the management of selected patients with rectal cancer. Complete clinical response observed after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer is one of these cases. Patients who present complete clinical response are candidates to the watch-and-wait approach, when radical surgery is not immediately performed and is offered only to patients in the event of a local relapse. These patients are included in a strict follow-up, and up of 70% of them will never be operated during the follow-up. This strategy is associated with similar oncological outcomes as patients operated on, and the advantage of avoiding the morbidity associated to the radical operation. In this article we will discuss in detail the best candidates for this approach, the protocol itself, and the long-term outcomes.

Background: Abdominal perineal excision (APE) has been associated with a high risk of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM+) and local recurrence rates in the treatment of rectal cancer. An alternative extralevator approach (ELAPE) has been suggested to improve the quality of resection by avoiding coning of the specimen decreasing the risk of tumor perforation and CRM+. The aim of this study is to compare the quality of the resected specimen and postoperative complication rates between ELAPE and "standard" APE., Methods: All patients between 1998 and 2014 undergoing abdominal perineal excision for primary or recurrent rectal cancer at a single Institution were reviewed. Between 1998 and 2008, all patients underwent standard APE. In 2009 ELAPE was introduced at our Institution and all patients requiring APE underwent this alternative procedure (ELAPE). The groups were compared according to pathological characteristics, specimen quality (CRM status, perforation and failure to provide the rectum and anus in a single specimen-fragmentation) and postoperative morbidity., Results: Fifty patients underwent standard APEs, while 22 underwent ELAPE. There were no differences in CRM+ (10.6 vs. 13.6%; p = 0.70) or tumor perforation rates (8 vs. 0%; p = 0.30) between APE and ELAPE. However, ELAPE were less likely to result in a fragmented specimen (42 vs. 4%; p = 0.002). Advanced pT-stage was also a risk factor for specimen fragmentation (p = 0.03). There were no differences in severe (Grade 3/4) postoperative morbidity (13 vs. 10%; p = 0.5). Perineal wound dehiscences were less frequent among ELAPE (52 vs 13%; p < 0.01). Despite short follow-up (median 21 mo.), 2-year local recurrence-free survival was better for patients undergoing ELAPE when compared to APE (87 vs. 49%; p = 0.04)., Conclusions: ELAPE may be safely implemented into routine clinical practice with no increase in postoperative morbidity and considerable improvements in the quality of the resected specimen of patients with low rectal cancers.

Background: Selected patients with rectal cancer and complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation have been managed nonoperatively with acceptable outcomes. However, ≈20% of these patients will develop early tumor regrowth. Identification of these patients could select candidates for more intensive follow-up., Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of baseline radiological T classification on recurrences after a complete clinical response managed nonoperatively after chemoradiation., Design: This was a retrospective review of a prospective collected database., Settings: The study was conducted at a single center., Patients: Patients with distal rectal cancer (cT2-4N0-2M0) undergoing extended chemoradiation (54 Gy + 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were eligible. Patients were reassessed for tumor response at 10 weeks after radiation completion. Patients with complete clinical response (clinical, radiological, and endoscopic) were managed nonoperatively and strictly followed., Main Outcomes Measures: Complete clinical response rates, early tumor regrowth rates (<12 mo), local recurrence-free survival, and distant metastases-free survival were measured., Results: A total of 91 consecutive patients with rectal cancer underwent extended chemoradiation. Sixty-one patients developed initial complete clinical response (67%). cT2 patients developed similar initial complete clinical response rates compared with cT3/T4 (72% vs 63%; p = 0.403). Early tumor regrowths were more frequent among baseline cT3/4 when compared with cT2 patients (30% vs 3%; p = 0.007). There were no differences in late local recurrences (p = 0.593) or systemic recurrences (p = 0.387). Local recurrence-free survival was significantly better for cT2 patients at 1 year (96% vs 69%; p = 0.009). After Cox regression analysis, baseline T stage was an independent predictor of improved local recurrence-free survival at 1 year (p = 0.03; OR = 0.09 (95% CI, 0.01-0.81))., Limitations: This study was limited by its small sample size, retrospective nature, and short follow-up., Conclusions: cT2 patients who develop complete clinical response after extended chemoradiation managed nonoperatively are less likely to develop early tumor regrowths when compared with cT3/4 patients. cT3/4 patients should undergo more intensive follow-up after a complete clinical response to allow for early detection of early regrowths.

In recent years, our understanding of rectal cancer has improved, including how locally advanced disease responds to chemotherapy and radiation. This has led to new innovations and advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, which includes organ-preserving strategies for responsive disease, and minimally invasive approaces for the performance of total mesorectal excision/protectomyh for persistently advanced disease. This article discusses new strategies for rectal cancer therapy, including Watch and Wait, local excision, minimally invasive proctectomy, and transanal total mesorectal excision particularly in the setting of preoperative multimodality treatment., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)