Cargando…

Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus yet for the best treatment regimen in patients with recurrent rectal cancer (RRC). This study aims to evaluate toxicity and oncological outcomes after re-irradiation in patients with RRC in our center. Clinical (cCR) and pathological complete response (pCR) rates an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dijkstra, Esmée A., Mul, Véronique E. M., Hemmer, Patrick H. J., Havenga, Klaas, Hospers, Geke A. P., Muijs, Christina T., van Etten, Boudewijn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8349344/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34023946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10070-6
_version_ 1783735549652107264
author Dijkstra, Esmée A.
Mul, Véronique E. M.
Hemmer, Patrick H. J.
Havenga, Klaas
Hospers, Geke A. P.
Muijs, Christina T.
van Etten, Boudewijn
author_facet Dijkstra, Esmée A.
Mul, Véronique E. M.
Hemmer, Patrick H. J.
Havenga, Klaas
Hospers, Geke A. P.
Muijs, Christina T.
van Etten, Boudewijn
author_sort Dijkstra, Esmée A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is no consensus yet for the best treatment regimen in patients with recurrent rectal cancer (RRC). This study aims to evaluate toxicity and oncological outcomes after re-irradiation in patients with RRC in our center. Clinical (cCR) and pathological complete response (pCR) rates and radicality were also studied. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2018, 61 locally advanced RRC patients were treated and analyzed retrospectively. Patients received radiotherapy at a dose of 30.0–30.6 Gy (reCRT) or 50.0–50.4 Gy chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in cases of no prior irradiation because of low-risk primary rectal cancer. In both groups, patients received capecitabine concomitantly. RESULTS: In total, 60 patients received the prescribed neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy followed by surgery, 35 patients (58.3%) in the reRCT group and 25 patients (41.7%) in the long-course CRT group. There were no significant differences in overall survival (p = 0.82), disease-free survival (p = 0.63), and local recurrence-free survival (p = 0.17) between the groups. Patients in the long-course CRT group reported more skin toxicity after radiotherapy (p = 0.040). No differences were observed in late toxicity. In the long-course CRT group, a significantly higher cCR rate was observed (p = 0.029); however, there was no difference in the pCR rate (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of RRC patients with re-irradiation is comparable to treatment with long-course CRT regarding toxicity and oncological outcomes. In the reCRT group, less cCR was observed, although there was no difference in pCR. The findings in this study suggest that it is safe and feasible to re-irradiate RRC patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10070-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8349344
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83493442021-08-20 Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible Dijkstra, Esmée A. Mul, Véronique E. M. Hemmer, Patrick H. J. Havenga, Klaas Hospers, Geke A. P. Muijs, Christina T. van Etten, Boudewijn Ann Surg Oncol Colorectal Cancer BACKGROUND: There is no consensus yet for the best treatment regimen in patients with recurrent rectal cancer (RRC). This study aims to evaluate toxicity and oncological outcomes after re-irradiation in patients with RRC in our center. Clinical (cCR) and pathological complete response (pCR) rates and radicality were also studied. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2018, 61 locally advanced RRC patients were treated and analyzed retrospectively. Patients received radiotherapy at a dose of 30.0–30.6 Gy (reCRT) or 50.0–50.4 Gy chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in cases of no prior irradiation because of low-risk primary rectal cancer. In both groups, patients received capecitabine concomitantly. RESULTS: In total, 60 patients received the prescribed neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy followed by surgery, 35 patients (58.3%) in the reRCT group and 25 patients (41.7%) in the long-course CRT group. There were no significant differences in overall survival (p = 0.82), disease-free survival (p = 0.63), and local recurrence-free survival (p = 0.17) between the groups. Patients in the long-course CRT group reported more skin toxicity after radiotherapy (p = 0.040). No differences were observed in late toxicity. In the long-course CRT group, a significantly higher cCR rate was observed (p = 0.029); however, there was no difference in the pCR rate (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of RRC patients with re-irradiation is comparable to treatment with long-course CRT regarding toxicity and oncological outcomes. In the reCRT group, less cCR was observed, although there was no difference in pCR. The findings in this study suggest that it is safe and feasible to re-irradiate RRC patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10070-6. Springer International Publishing 2021-05-22 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8349344/ /pubmed/34023946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10070-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Colorectal Cancer
Dijkstra, Esmée A.
Mul, Véronique E. M.
Hemmer, Patrick H. J.
Havenga, Klaas
Hospers, Geke A. P.
Muijs, Christina T.
van Etten, Boudewijn
Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title_full Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title_fullStr Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title_full_unstemmed Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title_short Re-Irradiation in Patients with Recurrent Rectal Cancer is Safe and Feasible
title_sort re-irradiation in patients with recurrent rectal cancer is safe and feasible
topic Colorectal Cancer
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8349344/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34023946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10070-6
work_keys_str_mv AT dijkstraesmeea reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT mulveroniqueem reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT hemmerpatrickhj reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT havengaklaas reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT hospersgekeap reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT muijschristinat reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible
AT vanettenboudewijn reirradiationinpatientswithrecurrentrectalcancerissafeandfeasible