The Role of Intraoperative Radiotherapy Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has been used in the treatment of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancers for the last several decades. Given the heterogeneity of patients treated and different indications for use and dosing at different institutions, it has been difficult to discern if IORT adds any appreciable benefit to standard of care therapies. Herein, the rationale for IORT in rectal cancer is discussed along with the most modern and best available data in 2023. IORT is likely indicated in patients with locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer with threatened margins (R0 or R1 resection) to help improve local control. High-quality imaging and multidisciplinary discussion are necessary to ensure optimal patient selection. Appropriate counseling of the patient and excellent team communication are of the utmost importance given the challenging nature of these cases and the prognostic implications of R1 and R2 resections in this patient population.

Not all stage I and II endometrial cancers are created equal: Recurrence-free survival and cause-specific survival after observation or vaginal brachytherapy alone in all subgroups of early-stage high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) after observation or vaginal brachytherapy (VB) alone in all subgroups of early-stage high-intermediate (HIR) and high-risk endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: We identified patients with stage I HIR (GOG-249 criteria) and stage II endometrioid EC, and stage I and II non-endometrioid EC who underwent surgery at Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic between 1999 and 2016. Three-year RFS and CSS after observation or VB only were estimated in 16 subgroups defined by risk factors. RESULTS: Among 4156 ECs, we identified 447 (10.8%) stage I endometrioid HIR, 52 (1.3%) stage II endometrioid, 350 (8.4%) stage I non-endometrioid, and 17 (0.4%) stage II non-endometrioid ECs; observation or VB alone was applied in 349 (78.1%), 24 (46.2%), 187 (53.4%), and 2 (11.8%) patients, respectively. After observation or VB, stage I HIR endometrioid EC subgroups with <2 factors among grade 3, LVSI, or stage IB had a 3-year CSS >95% (lower 95% confidence intervals limit: 89.8%), whereas subgroups with ≥2 factors had poorer outcomes. No EC-related deaths after 3 years were reported in 97 stage IA non-endometrioid ECs without myometrial invasion. Stage II ECs had poor outcomes regardless of histology. CONCLUSIONS: Observation or VB only may be sufficient in stage I endometrioid HIR ECs with <2 factors among grade 3, LVSI, or IB and in stage IA non-endometrioid ECs without myometrial invasion. Stratification of early-stage HIR and high-risk ECs into risk subgroups potentially alleviates the overtreatment and undertreatment risk and should be considered in future research.

Evolving Standards of Care in the Management of Localized Colorectal Cancer.

The treatment of patients with localized rectal cancer is complex and requires input from a multidisciplinary team. Baseline local staging and mismatch repair protein testing are vital to develop individualized treatment plans. There are multiple options in terms of treatment modalities and sequencing, including transanal excision, short-course radiation, long-course chemoradiation, chemotherapy doublet or triplet, nonoperative management, and immune checkpoint blockade for patients with mismatch repair deficient tumors. While localized colon cancer is typically treated with surgical resection and consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy, emerging data suggest that neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be beneficial in patients with higher-risk disease. Quality-of-life considerations are imperative to prevent potential chronic effects on psychosocial health, neuropathy, fertility, and bowel, bladder, and sexual function. The omission of radiation or surgery can mitigate these toxicities without diminishing oncologic outcomes. The optimal treatment plan and sequence is not a one-size-fits-all approach but rather should be personalized to the patient's disease burden, tumor location, comorbidities, and preferences.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for the treatment of oligometastatic gynecological malignancy in the abdomen and pelvis: A single-institution experience.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Metastasis-directed therapy with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in the setting of oligometastatic disease is a rapidly evolving paradigm given ongoing improvements in systemic therapies and diagnostic modalities. However, SBRT to targets in the abdomen and pelvis is historically associated with concerns about toxicity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SBRT to the abdomen and pelvis for women with oligometastases from primary gynecological tumors. MATERIALS/METHODS: From our IRB-approved registry, all patients who were treated with SBRT between 2014 and 2020 were identified. Oligometastatic disease was defined as 1 to 5 discrete foci of clinical metastasis radiographically diagnosed by positron emission tomography (PET) and/or computerized tomography (CT) imaging. The primary endpoint was local control at 12 months. Local and distant control rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Time intervals for development of local progression and distant progression were calculated based on follow up visits with re-staging imaging. Acute and late toxicity outcomes were determined based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. RESULTS: We identified 34 women with 43 treated lesions. Median age was 68 years (range 32-82), and median follow up time was 12 months (range 0.2-54.0). Most common primary tumor sites were ovarian (n=12), uterine (n=11), and cervical (n=7). Median number of previous lines of systemic therapy agents at time of SBRT was 2 (range 0-10). Overall, SBRT was delivered to 1 focus of oligometastasis in 29 cases, 2 foci in 2 cases, 3 foci in 2 cases, and 4 foci in 1 case. All patients were treated comprehensively with SBRT to all sites of oligometastasis. Median prescription dose was 24 Gy (range 18-54 Gy) in 3 fractions (range 3-6) to a median prescription isodose line of 83.5% (range 52-95). Local control by lesion at 12 and 24 months was 92.5% for both time points. Local failure was observed in three treated sites among two patients, two of which were at 11 months in one patient, and the other at 30 months. Systemic control rate was 60.2% at 12 months. Overall survival at 12 and 24 months was 85% and 70.2%, respectively. Acute grade 2 toxicities included nausea (n=3), and there were no grade > 3 acute toxicities. Late grade 1 toxicities included diarrhea (n=1) and fatigue (n=1), and there were no grade > 2 toxicities. CONCLUSION: SBRT to oligometastatic gynecologic malignancies in the abdomen and pelvis is feasible with encouraging preliminary safety and local control outcomes. This approach is associated with excellent local control and low rates of toxicity during our follow-up interval. Further investigations into technique, dose-escalation and utilization are warranted.