Definitive Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer: Is There a Role for Dose Escalation? A National Cancer Database Study.

BACKGROUND: Surgery remains the standard of care in rectal cancer. Select patients will not undergo surgery for reasons such as medical inoperability or a watch-and-wait approach and instead are managed with definitive chemoradiation. OBJECTIVE: We used the National Cancer Database to identify overall survival and predictors thereof in the nonoperative management of patients with rectal cancer. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review. SETTINGS: This study used deidentified data from the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: We queried the national cancer database from 2004 to 2014 for stage 1 to 3 rectal adenocarcinoma treated with only chemotherapy and radiation to definitive doses. Dose escalated therapy was defined as >54 Gy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify sociodemographic, treatment, and tumor characteristics predictive of dose escalation and overall survival. Propensity-adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios for survival were used to account for indication bias. RESULTS: Among the 6311 patients eligible for the study, 11% were treated with doses >54 Gy. Earlier stage and increased age/comorbidity patients were more likely to receive dose escalation, and patients with more recent treatment and treatment at an academic facility were less likely. The median follow-up time was 31 months (range, 2-154 mo). Three- and 5-year overall survival rates for all patients were 60% and 46%. Patients treated with dose escalation had a median survival of 33 months compared with 56 months for those treated with ≤54 Gy (p < 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: The main limitation is the inherent selection bias present in National Cancer Database studies. Important treatment details and outcomes as they relate to a definitive chemoradiation approach in rectal cancer are lacking. Salvage therapy was also not recorded, which in this population could be surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, dose escalation in the nonoperative management of rectal cancer was associated with a lower overall survival compared with more conventional doses. Careful patient selection and enrollment on appropriate clinical trials may be warranted in the nonoperative setting. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B15. LA QUIMIORRADIACIÓN DEFINITIVA PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL: ¿HAY LUGAR PARA EL AUMENTO DE LA DOSIS? UN ESTUDIO DE BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DEL CÁNCER:: La cirugía sigue siendo el estándar en el tratamiento del cáncer rectal. Algunos pacientes no son quirúrgicos por razones como, no ser operables o con el enfoque de ver y esperar, y en su lugar son tratados con la quimiorradiación definitiva.Utilizamos la base de datos nacional del cáncer para identificar la supervivencia general y los factores predictivos de la misma, en el tratamiento no quirúrgico de pacientes con cáncer rectal.Esta fue una revisión retrospectiva.Utilizamos los datos identificados en la base de datos nacional del cáncer.Se consultó la base de datos nacional del cáncer del 2004-2014, para adenocarcinoma rectal en estadio 1-3, tratada únicamente con quimioterapia y radiación hasta la dosis definitiva. La terapia de aumento de la dosis se definió como >54 Gy.Se realizaron análisis univariables y multivariables para identificar características sociodemográficas, de tratamiento y predictivas del aumento de la dosis y supervivencia en general. Los índices de riesgo proporcionales de Cox ajustados a la propensión para la supervivencia, se utilizaron para tener en cuenta el sesgo de indicación.Entre los 6311 pacientes elegibles para el estudio, el 11% fue tratado con dosis >54 Gy. Los pacientes en estadios tempranos y con mayor edad/comorbilidad, tenían más probabilidades de recibir aumento de la dosis, y menos propensos los pacientes con tratamientos recientes y de centros académicos. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 31 meses (2-154 meses). Las tasas de supervivencia global de tres y cinco años para todos los pacientes, fueron respectivamente del 60% y 46%. Los pacientes tratados con aumento de la dosis, tuvieron una supervivencia media de 33 meses, en comparación con los 56 meses para los pacientes tratados con ≤54 Gy (p < 0,0001).La principal limitación es el inherente sesgo en la selección, presente en los estudios de la base de datos nacional del cáncer. Faltan los detalles importantes del tratamiento y los resultados en relación con el enfoque definitivo de quimiorradiación en cáncer rectal. Tampoco se registró la terapia de rescate, que en esta población podría ser la cirugía.En este análisis, el aumento de la dosis en el manejo no quirúrgico del cáncer rectal, se asoció con una menor supervivencia global, en comparación con la dosis más convencional. La cuidadosa selección del paciente y la inscripción en los apropiados ensayos clínicos, pueden estar justificados en el entorno no quirúrgico. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B15.

Analysis of Post-operative Adjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Adjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy Outcomes in Non-metastatic Cholangiocarcinoma: an NCDB Review.

BACKGROUND: Each year, approximately 8000 cases of cholangiocarcinoma are recorded in the USA. Surgical resection is considered to be the only curative option. Despite surgery as a curative approach, many patients will require adjuvant therapies in the form of chemotherapy (ChT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT). As such, we sought to analyze outcomes in patients with non-metastatic cholangiocarcinoma receiving adjuvant ChT or CRT following surgical resection. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with a diagnosis of non-metastatic cholangiocarcinoma between the years 2010 and 2015 who underwent adjuvant ChT or CRT following surgery. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using Kaplan Meier method. Cox proportional hazard ratios were used to identify predictors of overall survival, and logistic regression was used to identify predictors of receiving each treatment. RESULTS: A total of 875 patients were identified who met the above eligibility criteria. Of these patients, 818 received adjuvant chemotherapy alone with 57 patients receiving adjuvant chemoradiation therapy. The median OS in patients receiving CRT was 19.8 months versus 11.9 months for ChT (p value < 0.0238). The 1- and 5-year survival rates between ChT and CRT were 50% vs 61% and 6% vs 13%, respectively (hazard ratio 0.7005; 95% CI 0.51-0.97; p value < 0.0294). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest a potential benefit of chemoradiation therapy in the adjuvant setting, although the trends appear to show rare utilization. Given the limitations of our study, prospective corroboration is warranted.

Predictors of Pathologic Response After Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database Analysis.

Purpose/objectives Induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgical resection in rectal cancer, known as total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), is associated with improved pathologic complete response (pCR) rates. The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify factors associated with pCR and survival following treatment with TNT compared to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Materials/methods The National Cancer Database was queried from 2004 to 2015 for patients with locally advanced, non-metastatic rectal cancer. We identified 16,299 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation followed by definitive surgical resection. Patients were stratified by treatment received, either TNT (n=350) or nCRT (n=15,949). Multivariate binomial regression analysis and propensity matching were used to evaluate predictors of pCR. Kaplan-Meier and Cox multivariate analysis of survival were performed. Results Median follow-up was 38 months vs 53 months in the TNT vs nCRT groups, respectively. There were more patients with T4 or node-positive disease in the TNT group. There was a trend towards improved pCR in the TNT group (p=0.053). Patients achieving pCR had improved 5-year overall survival (OS) of 85.1%. The 5-year OS was not improved for TNT (76.2%) over nCRT (69.9%) (p=0.19). Pelvic nodal pCR was significantly higher in the TNT group (72%). When stratified by clinical stage, patients with cT3 (p=0.038) or cN1 (p=0.049) disease had improved OS with TNT. Conclusions Compared to nCRT, TNT is correlated with higher rates of complete pelvic nodal clearance in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. The use of TNT showed improved survival in patients with cT3 and cN1 disease, indicating a potential benefit for patients with less advanced disease.

Radiation Toxicity in Patients With Collagen Vascular Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies.

PURPOSE: Several retrospective series have reported that patients with collagen vascular disease (CVD) are at increased risk of radiation (RT) toxicity. However, the evidence is mixed, and many series lack control groups. We performed a meta-analysis including only case-cohort or randomized studies that examined the risk of RT toxicity for patients with CVD compared with controls. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines were used to perform a comprehensive search identifying case-control or randomized studies reporting RT toxicity outcomes for patients with CVD versus controls. Data were synthesized from studies reporting grade 2 to 3 or more (G2/3 +) acute and late RT toxicities. Results were analyzed with fixed effects meta-analysis on the random-effects model for between-study heterogeneity; otherwise, the fixed-effects model was used. Hazard ratio or odds ratio (OR) were the effect-size estimators, as appropriate. RESULTS: Ten studies were included, with 4028 patients (CVD: 406, control: 3622). Patients with CVD had higher rates of acute G2/3 + toxicity (26.2% vs 16.5%, OR [odds ratio] 2.01; P < .001) and late G2/3 + toxicity (18.4% vs 10.1%, OR 2.37; P < .001). Higher rates of late G2/3 + toxicity were observed for CVD patients with systemic lupus erythematous (21% vs 9.7%; OR 2.55, P = .03), systemic scleroderma (31.8% vs 9.7%, OR 3.85; P = .03), rheumatoid arthritis (11.7% vs 8.4%, OR = 2.56; P = .008), and those irradiated to the pelvis/abdomen (32.2% vs 11.9%, OR 3.29; P = .001), breast (14.7% vs 4.4%, OR 3.51; P = .003), thorax (12.5% vs 8.7%, OR 3.46; P < .001), and skin (14.6% vs 5.2%, OR 2.59; P = .02). Late grade 5 toxicities were significantly higher for patients with CVD, although absolute rates were low (3.9% vs 0.6%, OR = 7.81; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate and severe toxicities are more likely in patients with CVD, with variable risk depending on toxicity grade, CVD subtype, treatment site, and dose. Severe toxicities are uncommon. These factors should be considered when informing patients of treatment-related risks and monitoring for morbid treatment sequelae.