Cargando…
Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study
PURPOSE: To report on organ preservation following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in a prospective cohort of locally advanced rectal cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty-two patients received CRT. MRI and (18)F-FDG-PET/CT were performed prior to CRT. Response assessment was done 6 and 12 weeks aft...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382364/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35993092 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2022.07.009 |
_version_ | 1784769270851305472 |
---|---|
author | Bulens, Philippe P. Smets, Lien Debucquoy, Annelies Joye, Ines D'Hoore, André Wolthuis, Albert Debrun, Lynn Dekervel, Jeroen Van Cutsem, Eric Dresen, Raphaëla Vandecaveye, Vincent Deroose, Christophe M. Sagaert, Xavier Haustermans, Karin |
author_facet | Bulens, Philippe P. Smets, Lien Debucquoy, Annelies Joye, Ines D'Hoore, André Wolthuis, Albert Debrun, Lynn Dekervel, Jeroen Van Cutsem, Eric Dresen, Raphaëla Vandecaveye, Vincent Deroose, Christophe M. Sagaert, Xavier Haustermans, Karin |
author_sort | Bulens, Philippe P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To report on organ preservation following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in a prospective cohort of locally advanced rectal cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty-two patients received CRT. MRI and (18)F-FDG-PET/CT were performed prior to CRT. Response assessment was done 6 and 12 weeks after CRT using digital rectal examination, MRI, (18)F-FDG-PET/CT and endoscopy. For clinical complete response or minimal residual disease, a watch-and-wait (W&W) protocol was started. Regrowth-free survival (ReFS), Total Mesorectal Excision-free disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method. Functional outcome was compared with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test using EORTC QLQ-C30, MSKCC BFI, LARS and IIEF-5/FSFI-5 questionnaires. A previously developed prediction model performance was tested using receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: 29/52 patients entered a W&W protocol. There was no difference in two-year DMFS (81.1 % vs 78.8 %, p = 0.82), two-year OS (96.4 % vs 100 %, p = 0.38) and two-year DFS (77.5 % vs 78.8 %, p = 0.87) between W&W patients and those who underwent surgery at 12 weeks after CRT. Two-year DMFS differed between W&W with local regrowth, W&W with sustained response and patients who had surgery (66.7 % vs 88.0 % vs 78.8 %; p = 0.04). At 6 and 12 months, W&W patients reported good QoL and bowel function. The model validation reached an AUC of 0.627. CONCLUSION: Good functional outcome in patients with rectal cancer allocated to surveillance after CRT needs to be balanced against potentially worse DMFS in a subset of patients without sustained clinical complete response. Reliable prediction of patients eligible for surveillance programs needs further investigation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9382364 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93823642022-08-18 Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study Bulens, Philippe P. Smets, Lien Debucquoy, Annelies Joye, Ines D'Hoore, André Wolthuis, Albert Debrun, Lynn Dekervel, Jeroen Van Cutsem, Eric Dresen, Raphaëla Vandecaveye, Vincent Deroose, Christophe M. Sagaert, Xavier Haustermans, Karin Clin Transl Radiat Oncol Original Research Article PURPOSE: To report on organ preservation following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in a prospective cohort of locally advanced rectal cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty-two patients received CRT. MRI and (18)F-FDG-PET/CT were performed prior to CRT. Response assessment was done 6 and 12 weeks after CRT using digital rectal examination, MRI, (18)F-FDG-PET/CT and endoscopy. For clinical complete response or minimal residual disease, a watch-and-wait (W&W) protocol was started. Regrowth-free survival (ReFS), Total Mesorectal Excision-free disease-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method. Functional outcome was compared with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test using EORTC QLQ-C30, MSKCC BFI, LARS and IIEF-5/FSFI-5 questionnaires. A previously developed prediction model performance was tested using receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: 29/52 patients entered a W&W protocol. There was no difference in two-year DMFS (81.1 % vs 78.8 %, p = 0.82), two-year OS (96.4 % vs 100 %, p = 0.38) and two-year DFS (77.5 % vs 78.8 %, p = 0.87) between W&W patients and those who underwent surgery at 12 weeks after CRT. Two-year DMFS differed between W&W with local regrowth, W&W with sustained response and patients who had surgery (66.7 % vs 88.0 % vs 78.8 %; p = 0.04). At 6 and 12 months, W&W patients reported good QoL and bowel function. The model validation reached an AUC of 0.627. CONCLUSION: Good functional outcome in patients with rectal cancer allocated to surveillance after CRT needs to be balanced against potentially worse DMFS in a subset of patients without sustained clinical complete response. Reliable prediction of patients eligible for surveillance programs needs further investigation. Elsevier 2022-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9382364/ /pubmed/35993092 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2022.07.009 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Bulens, Philippe P. Smets, Lien Debucquoy, Annelies Joye, Ines D'Hoore, André Wolthuis, Albert Debrun, Lynn Dekervel, Jeroen Van Cutsem, Eric Dresen, Raphaëla Vandecaveye, Vincent Deroose, Christophe M. Sagaert, Xavier Haustermans, Karin Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title | Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title_full | Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title_short | Nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A prospective cohort study |
title_sort | nonoperative versus operative approach according to the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382364/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35993092 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2022.07.009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bulensphilippep nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT smetslien nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT debucquoyannelies nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT joyeines nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT dhooreandre nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT wolthuisalbert nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT debrunlynn nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT dekerveljeroen nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT vancutsemeric nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT dresenraphaela nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT vandecaveyevincent nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT deroosechristophem nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT sagaertxavier nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy AT haustermanskarin nonoperativeversusoperativeapproachaccordingtotheresponsetoneoadjuvantchemoradiotherapyforrectalcanceraprospectivecohortstudy |