RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma bears a treatment strategy unique to other anal cancers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe oncologic outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy followed by watch-and-wait approach for anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients with anal adenocarcinoma treated between 2004 and 2019 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Fifty-four patients received neoadjuvant therapy and were divided into 2 groups according to their treatment strategy: total neoadjuvant therapy versus single neoadjuvant modality therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Organ preservation, tumor regrowth, local failure, distant metastasis rates, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: This study included 70 patients with anal adenocarcinoma. Fifty-four patients (77%) received neoadjuvant therapy, of whom 30 (42%) received total neoadjuvant therapy and 24 (34%) received single neoadjuvant modality. Twenty-three (33%) patients achieved complete clinical response and were managed by watch-and-wait approach. The proportion of patients able to continue to watch-and-wait approach was higher after receiving total neoadjuvant therapy (60%) compared with single neoadjuvant modality therapy (20%; p = 0.004). A tumor regrowth rate of 22% was observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 70% (95% CI, 59%-83%), including 61% (95% CI, 42%-88%) for the total neoadjuvant therapy and 65% (95% CI, 48%-88%) for the single neoadjuvant modality groups. Colostomy was avoided in 50% of patients who received total neoadjuvant therapy and 83% of watch-and-wait patients. Five-year recurrence-free survival rates of 55% (95% CI, 39%-79%) and 30% (95% CI, 15%-58%) were observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy and single neoadjuvant modality groups. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report in the literature describing the safety and feasibility of nonoperative management for anal adenocarcinoma. Anal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and nonoperative management achieve regrowth rates comparable to those observed in rectal cancer, with oncologic outcomes similar to those of traditional treatment strategies. See Video Abstract . ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL TRATADO EN LA ERA DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL Y EL TRATAMIENTO NO QUIRRGICO: ANTECEDENTES:El adenocarcinoma anal conlleva una estrategia de tratamiento único para otros cánceres anales.OBJETIVO:Describir los resultados oncológicos de la terapia neoadyuvante total seguida de observar y esperar en adenocarcinoma anal.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal tratados entre 2004-2019.INTERVENCIONES:Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes recibieron terapia neoadyuvante y se dividieron en dos grupos según su estrategia de tratamiento: terapia neoadyuvante total versus terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Preservación de órganos, recurrencia tumoral, falla local, tasas de metástasis a distancia, libre de recurrencia y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:El estudio incluyó a 70 pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal. Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes (77%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante, de los cuales 30 (42%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y 24 (34%) recibieron modalidad neoadyuvante única. Veintitrés (33%) pacientes presentaron una respuesta clínica completa y fueron tratados con vigilancia y espera. La proporción de pacientes capaces de continuar en observar y esperar fue mayor después de recibir terapia neoadyuvante total (60%) en comparación con la terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única (20%) ( p = 0,004). Se observó una tasa de recurrencia tumoral del 22% en el grupo de terapia neoadyuvante total. La tasa de supervivencia general a 5 años fue del 70% (IC95% 59%-83 %), incluido el 61% (IC95% 42%-88%) para la terapia neoadyuvante total y el 65% (IC95% 48%-88%) para grupos de modalidad neoadyuvante única. Se evitó la colostomía en el 50% de los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y el 83% de los pacientes en observar y esperar. Se observaron tasas de supervivencia libre de recurrencia a cinco años del 55% (IC95% 39%-79%) y del 30% (IC95% 15%-58%) en los grupos de terapia neoadyuvante total y modalidad neoadyuvante única, respectivamente.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer informe en la literatura que describe la seguridad y viabilidad del tratamiento no quirúrgico del adenocarcinoma anal. El adenocarcinoma anal tratado con terapia neoadyuvante total y manejo no quirúrgico logra tasas de recurrencia comparables a las observadas en el cáncer de recto, con resultados oncológicos similares a las estrategias de tratamientos tradicionales. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias do Ânus , Neoplasias Retais , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Conduta Expectante , Neoplasias Retais/patologia , Neoplasias do Ânus/terapia , Neoplasias do Ânus/patologia , Quimiorradioterapia , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/terapia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento , Estadiamento de NeoplasiasRESUMO
National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend radiation therapy (RT) for localized indolent non-Hodgkin lymphomas (iNHL). Many referring physicians avoid RT to the head and neck (HN) due to fears of toxicity. Very low-dose radiation (4 Gy) for select patients produces sustained local control and recently gained popularity. We compared early and late toxicities of standard 24-30 Gy to 4 Gy in patients with HN iNHL. We retrospectively analyzed 266 consecutive patients with HN iNHL receiving RT from 1994 to 2017. Patient characteristics, outcomes, and toxicities were collected from medical records. Early (≤2 months post-RT) and late (>2 months post-RT) toxicities were graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. Grades 1-2 were defined as "low-grade" and 3-4 "high-grade." Toxicity incidence was compared between 4 and >4 Gy, grouped by treated site (orbit, nonorbital head, neck, skin) and early versus late. Median follow-up was 23 months (2-145) and 68 months (2-256) for 4Gy and >4 Gy cohorts, respectively. Median dose for the >4 Gy cohort was 30 Gy (10.5-54 Gy). Early and late toxicity incidences were lower in the 4 Gy cohort compared to >4 Gy across all RT-sites: early toxicity, orbit, 42% versus 96%; nonorbital head, 24% versus 96%; neck, 22% versus 94%; skin, 31% versus 87%; late toxicity, orbit, 20% versus 71%; nonorbital head, 6% versus 66%; neck, 6% versus 57%; skin, 0% versus 46% (4 Gy vs. >4 Gy, respectively). Toxicities among both cohorts were largely low-grade. High-grade early and late toxicities did not occur in the 4 Gy cohort. There was 1 high-grade early toxicity (Grade 3 dry mouth) and 17 high-grade late toxicities (Grade 3 cataracts) in the >4 Gy cohort. RT to HN for iNHL is associated with minimal short- and long-term toxicity and excellent local control among 4 Gy and >4 Gy treatments. In this setting, "toxicity" concerns should not deter oncologists from potentially curative RT. In select patients where toxicity remains a concern, very low dose 4 Gy could be considered.