Rectal sparing approach after preoperative radio - and/or Chemo-therapy (ReSARCh): a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Rectal-sparing approaches for patients with rectal cancer who achieved a complete or major response following neoadjuvant therapy constitute a paradigm of a potential shift in the management of patients with rectal cancer, however their role remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of rectal-sparing approaches to preserve the rectum without impairing the outcomes. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, observational study investigated the outcomes of patients with clinical stage II-III mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma treated with any neoadjuvant therapy, and either transanal local excision or watch-and-wait approach, based on tumor response (major or complete) and patient/surgeon choice. The primary endpoint of the study was rectum preservation at a minimum follow-up of two years. Secondary endpoints were overall, disease-free, local and distant recurrence-free, and stoma-free survival at three years. RESULTS: Of 178 patients enrolled in 16 centres, 112 (62.9%) were managed with local excision and 66 (37.1%) with watch-and-wait. At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 36.1 (30.6-45.6) months, the rectum was preserved in 144 (80.9%) patients. The 3-year rectum-sparing, overall, disease-free, local recurrence-free, distant recurrence-free survival was 80.6% (95%CI 73.9-85.8), 97.6% (95%CI 93.6-99.1), 90.0% (95%CI 84.3-93.7), 94.7% (95%CI 90.1-97.2), and 94.6% (95%CI 89.9-97.2), respectively. The 3-year stoma-free survival was 95.0% (95%CI 89.5-97.6). The 3-year regrowth-free survival in the watch-and-wait group was 71.8% (95%CI 59.9-81.2). CONCLUSIONS: In rectal cancer patients with major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy, the rectum can be preserved in about 80% of cases, without compromise the outcomes.

Completion total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and local excision for rectal cancer.

AIM: Local excision (LE) in selected cases after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in clinically complete or major responders has been recently reported as an alternative to standard radical resection. Completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is generally performed when high-risk pathological features are found in LE surgical specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of residual tumour and lymph node metastases after cTME in patients previously treated by RCT + LE. The secondary aims were to quantify the rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality and to evaluate the long-term oncological outcome of this group of patients. METHODS: All patients treated from 2007 to 2020 by LE for locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinically complete or major response to RCT who had a subsequent cTME for high-risk pathological factors (ypT >1 and/or TRG >2 and/or positive margins) were included in this multicentre retrospective study. Pathological data, postoperative short-term morbidity (classified according to Clavien-Dindo) and mortality and oncological long-term outcome after cTME were recorded in a database. Statistical analysis was performed using Wizard for iOS version 1.9.31. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The rate of R0 resection was 95.7%, and a sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 37 patients (78.7%), with a protective stoma rate of 78.4%. In 28 cases (59.6%), it was possible to perform a minimally invasive approach. A residual tumour (pT and/or pN) on cTME specimens was found in 21 cases (44.7%). The rate of lymph node metastases was 12.8%. The overall short-term (within 30 days) postoperative morbidity was 34%, but grade >2 postoperative complications occurred in only nine patients (19.1%), with a reoperation rate of 6.4%. No short-term postoperative deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 57 months (range: 21-174), the long-term stoma-free rate was 70.2%, and the actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were 86.7%, 88.9% and 95.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: When patients exhibit high-risk pathological factors after RCT + LE, cTME should be suggested due to the high risk of residual tumour or lymph node involvement (44.7%). The results after cTME in terms of the rate of R0 resection, sphincter-saving procedure, postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term oncological outcome seem to be acceptable and do not represent a contraindication to use LE as a first-step treatment in patients with major or complete clinical response after RCT.

Oligo-metastatic neoPlasms from the gastro-intestinal tract: iDentIfiCaTIon of cliNical and molecular drivers: the PREDICTION study.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic disease in tumors originating from the gastrointestinal tract can exhibit varying degrees of tumor burden at presentation. Some patients follow a less aggressive disease course, characterized by a limited number of metastatic sites, referred to as "oligo-metastatic disease" (OMD). The precise biological characteristics that define the oligometastatic behavior remain uncertain. In this study, we present a protocol designed to prospectively identify OMD, with the aim of proposing novel therapeutic approaches and monitoring strategies. METHODS: The PREDICTION study is a monocentric, prospective, observational investigation. Enrolled patients will receive standard treatment, while translational activities will involve analysis of the tumor microenvironment and genomic profiling using immunohistochemistry and next-generation sequencing, respectively. The first primary objective (descriptive) is to determine the prevalence of biological characteristics in OMD derived from gastrointestinal tract neoplasms, including high genetic concordance between primary tumors and metastases, a significant infiltration of T lymphocytes, and the absence of clonal evolution favoring specific driver genes (KRAS and PIK3CA). The second co-primary objective (analytic) is to identify a prognostic score for true OMD, with a primary focus on metastatic colorectal cancer. The score will comprise genetic concordance (> 80%), high T-lymphocyte infiltration, and the absence of clonal evolution favoring driver genes. It is hypothesized that patients with true OMD (score 3+) will have a lower rate of progression/recurrence within one year (20%) compared to those with false OMD (80%). The endpoint of the co-primary objective is the rate of recurrence/progression at one year. Considering a reasonable probability (60%) of the three factors occurring simultaneously in true OMD (score 3+), using a significance level of α = 0.05 and a test power of 90%, the study requires a minimum enrollment of 32 patients. DISCUSSION: Few studies have explored the precise genetic and biological features of OMD thus far. In clinical settings, the diagnosis of OMD is typically made retrospectively, as some patients who undergo intensive treatment for oligometastases develop polymetastatic diseases within a year, while others do not experience disease progression (true OMD). In the coming years, the identification of true OMD will allow us to employ more personalized and comprehensive strategies in cancer treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05806151.

The Role of Colonoscopy in the Management of Individuals with Lynch Syndrome: A Narrative Review.

The history of Lynch syndrome changed definitively in 2000, when a study published in Gastroenterology demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality among individuals with Lynch syndrome who undergo regular endoscopic surveillance. As a consequence of this clinical evidence, all scientific societies developed guidelines, which highlighted the role of colonoscopy in the management of Lynch syndrome, especially for individuals at high risk of colorectal cancer. Over the years, these guidelines were modified and updated. Specialized networks were developed in order to standardize endoscopic surveillance programs and evaluate all the clinical data retrieved by the results of colonoscopies performed for both the screening and the surveillance of individuals with Lynch syndrome. Recent data show that the impact of colonoscopy (with polypectomy) on the prevention of colorectal cancer in individuals with Lynch syndrome is less significant than previously thought. This narrative review summarizes the current discussion, the hypotheses elaborated and the algorithms depicted for the management of individuals with Lynch Syndrome on the basis of the recent data published in the literature.

The MIS-COVID-AGICT Study: Trend of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastrointestinal Cancer Treatment During the First Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy. Subgroup Analysis from the COVID-AGICT Study: COVID-19 and Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Treatment.

Background: A preliminary analysis from the COVID-Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Treatment (AGICT) study showed that the rate of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for elective and urgent procedures did not decrease during the pandemic year. In this article, we aimed to perform a subgroup analysis using data from the COVID-AGICT study to evaluate the trend of MIS during the COVID-19 pandemic period in Italy. Methods: This study was conducted collecting data of MIS patients from the COVID-AGICT database. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic scenario reduced MIS for elective treatment of gastrointestinal cancer (GIC) in Italy in 2020. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic period on perioperative outcomes in the MIS group. Results: In the pandemic year, 62% of patients underwent surgery with a minimally invasive approach, compared to 63% in 2019 (P = .23). In 2020, the proportion of patients undergoing elective MIS decreased compared to the previous year (80% versus 82%, P = .04), and the rate of urgent MIS did not differ between the 2 years (31% and 33% in 2019 and 2020 - P = .66). Colorectal cancer was less likely to be treated with MIS approach during 2020 (78% versus 75%, P < .001). Conversely, the rate of MIS pancreatic resection was higher in 2020 (28% versus 22%, P < .002). Conversion to an open approach was lower in 2020 (7.2% versus 9.2% - P = .01). Major postoperative complications were similar in both years (11% versus 11%, P = .9). Conclusion: In conclusion, although MIS for elective treatment of GIC in Italy was reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic period, our study revealed that the overall proportion of MIS (elective and urgent) and postoperative outcomes were comparable to the prepandemic period. ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04686747).

Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging in Rectal Cancer Restaging.

The assessment of tumor response, after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (n-CRT), permits the stratification of patients for the proper therapeutical management. Although histopathology analysis of the surgical speciemen is considered the gold standard for assessing tumor response, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), with its significant developments in technical imaging, have allowed an increase in accuracy for the evaluation of response. MRI provides a radiological tumor regression grade (mrTRG) that is correlated with the pathologic tumor regression grade (pTRG). Functional MRI parameters have additional impending in early prediction of the efficacy of therapy. Some of functional methodologies are already part of clinical practice: diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) and perfusion imaging (dynamic contrast enhanced MRI [DCE-MRI]).

The COVID - AGICT study: COVID-19 and advanced gastro-intestinal cancer surgical treatment. A multicentric Italian study on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic impact on gastro-intestinal cancers surgical treatment during the 2020. Analysis of perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This Italian multicentric retrospective study aimed to investigate the possible changes in outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Our primary endpoint was to determine whether the pandemic scenario increased the rate of patients with colorectal, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic cancers resected at an advanced stage in 2020 compared to 2019. Considering different cancer staging systems, we divided tumors into early stages and advanced stages, using pathological outcomes. Furthermore, to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes, perioperative data of both 2020 and 2019 were also examined. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 8250 patients, 4370 (53%) and 3880 (47%) were surgically treated during 2019 and 2020 respectively, in 62 Italian surgical Units. In 2020, the rate of patients treated with an advanced pathological stage was not different compared to 2019 (P = 0.25). Nevertheless, the analysis of quarters revealed that in the second half of 2020 the rate of advanced cancer resected, tented to be higher compared with the same months of 2019 (P = 0.05). During the pandemic year 'Charlson Comorbidity Index score of cancer patients (5.38 ± 2.08 vs 5.28 ± 2.22, P = 0.036), neoadjuvant treatments (23.9% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001), rate of urgent diagnosis (24.2% vs 20.3%, P < 0.001), colorectal cancer urgent resection (9.4% vs. 7.37, P < 0.001), and the rate of positive nodes on the total nodes resected per surgery increased significantly (7 vs 9% - 2.02 ± 4.21 vs 2.39 ± 5.23, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic did not influence the pathological stage of colorectal, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic cancers at the time of surgery, our study revealed that the pandemic scenario negatively impacted on several perioperative and post-operative outcomes.

Short- and long-term outcomes in ypT2 rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant therapy and local excision: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Although local excision (LE) after neoadjuvant treatment (NT) has achieved encouraging oncological outcomes in selected patients, radical surgery still remains the rule when unfavorable pathology occurs. However, there is a risk of undertreating patients not eligible for radical surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with pathological incomplete response (ypT2) in a multicentre cohort of patients undergoing LE after NT and to compare them with ypT0-is-1 rectal cancers. METHODS: From 2010 to 2019, all patients who underwent LE after NT for rectal cancer were identified from five institutional retrospective databases. After excluding 12 patients with ypT3 tumors, patients with ypT2 tumors were compared to patients with ypT0-is-1 tumors). The endpoints of the study were early postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 177 patients (132 males, 45 females, median age 70 [IQR 16] years) underwent LE following NT. There were 46 ypT2 patients (39 males, 7 females, median age 72 [IQR 18.25] years) and 119 ypT0-is-1 patients (83 males, 36 females, median age 69 [IQR 15] years). Patients with pathological incomplete response (ypT2) were frailer than the ypT0-is-1 patients (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index 6.15 ± 2.43 vs. 5.29 ± 1.99; p = 0.02) and there was a significant difference in the type of NT used for the two groups (long- course radiotherapy: 100 (84%) vs. 23 (63%), p = 0.006; short-course radiotherapy: 19 (16%) vs. 17 (37%), p = 0.006). The postoperative rectal bleeding rate (13% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.008), readmission rate (10.9% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.008) and R1 resection rate (8.7% vs. 0; p = 0.008) was significantly higher in the ypT2 group. Recurrence rates were comparable between groups (5% vs. 13%; p = 0.15). Five-year overall survival was 91.3% and 94.9% in the ypT2 and ypT0-is-1 groups, respectively (p = 0.39), while 5-year cancer specific survival was 93.4% in the ypT2 group and 94.9% in the ypT0-is-1 group (p = 0.70). No difference was found in terms of 5-year local recurrence free-survival (p = 0.18) and 5-year distant recurrence free-survival (p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ypT2 tumors after NT and LE have a higher risk of late-onset rectal bleeding and positive resection margins than patients with complete or near complete response. However, long-term recurrence rates and survival seem comparable.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Pathologic stage of ypT0N+ rectal cancers following neo-adjuvant treatment: clinical interpretation of an orphan status.

Approximately 20% of locally advanced rectal cancers treated with neoadjuvant therapy achieve a pathologic complete response, but approximately 10% of them present residual nodal metastases (ypT0N+). We aimed this research to compare the survival rates of ypT0/ypTisN+ and stage 3a rectal cancer patients. A large multicenter study recently investigated ypT0/ypTis rectal cancers treated between 2005 and 2015 in Italy and Spain. ypT0/ypTisN+ were selected and compared with stage 3a rectal cancers treated at the same institutions with upfront surgery (ySICO group). Additionally, the SEER database was searched for patients with stage 3a rectal cancers treated with surgery in the same years. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and disease-specific survival (DSS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and random survival forest analysis (RSF). The ySICO study population consisted of 19 ypT0/2ypTisN+ (mean follow-up 41.8 months) and 72 Stage 3a patients (mean follow-up 56.9 months). These subgroups were comparable, but stage 3a patients were treated more frequently with adjuvant therapy (90.5% vs 61.9%, p 0.0001). No significant differences were reported between the ySICO subgroups for the OS, DFS, and DSS curves. When the 1213 SEER patients were added to Stage 3a, the RFS model failed to differentiate OS between groups that presented identical survival. Root analysis showed that adjuvant therapy was the only variable differentiating OS and DSS in the ySICO population. These findings suggest that ypT0/ypTisN+ and stage 3a rectal cancers could be ranked together based on their similar outcomes and pathologic assessment, and they stress the importance of adjuvant therapy in patients presenting with residual nodal metastases.

Electrochemotherapy of Primary Colon Rectum Cancer and Local Recurrence: Case Report and Prospective Analysis.

PURPOSE: Surgery, radiotherapy, and oncological treatment (chemotherapy and antineoplastic antibodies) are standard treatments of rectal cancer. ECT has shown its effectiveness and suitability in deep solid tumors conducted in both preclinical and clinical studies. We show here an update and preliminary results with locally advanced rectum cancer (LARC) treated with ECT. METHODS: Two patients with major clinical response to restaging after neoadjuvant treatment for LARC were subjected to ECT 12 weeks after completing chemo-radiation therapy. One patient was subjected to ECT on a colorectal local recurrence formed after neoadjuvant treatment for LARC and surgery. Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging were used to assess ECT response. RESULTS: The results showed stable disease in two of the three patients treated, while one patient achieved a complete response. The local control of disease is maintained in the patient follow-up. For each patient, a reduction in pain was observed and for the patient with local recurrence, a reduction in bleeding present before ECT was also achieved. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results showed that ECT is a safe and effective treatment in patients with a major clinical response or local recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy for LARC and allows a reduction in pain and bleeding with a consequent improvement to quality of life.

Rectal Sparing Approach After Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: The Preliminary Results of the ReSARCh Trial.

BACKGROUND: Rectum-preservation for locally advanced rectal cancer has been proposed as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with major (mCR) or complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy. The purpose of this study was to report on the short-term outcomes of ReSARCh (Rectal Sparing Approach after preoperative Radio- and/or Chemotherapy) trial, which is a prospective, multicenter, observational trial that investigated the role of transanal local excision (LE) and watch-and-wait (WW) as integrated approaches after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients with mid-low rectal cancer who achieved mCR or cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and were fit for major surgery were enrolled. Clinical response was evaluated at 8 and 12 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. Treatment approach, incidence, and reasons for subsequent TME were recorded. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2019, 160 patients were enrolled; mCR or cCR at 12 weeks was achieved in 64 and 96 of patients, respectively. Overall, 98 patients were managed with LE and 62 with WW. In the LE group, Clavien-Dindo 3+ complications occurred in three patients. The rate of cCR increased from 8- to 12-week restaging. Thirty-three (94.3%) of 35 patients with cCR had ypT0-1 tumor. At a median 24 months follow-up, a tumor regrowth was found in 15 (24.2%) patients undergoing WW. CONCLUSIONS: LE for patients achieving cCR or mCR is safe. A 12-week interval from chemoradiotherapy completion to LE is correlated with an increased cCR rate. The risk of ypT > is reduced when LE is performed after cCR.

Structured reporting of computed tomography in the staging of colon cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal.

BACKGROUND: Structured reporting (SR) in radiology is becoming increasingly necessary and has been recognized recently by major scientific societies. This study aims to build structured CT-based reports in colon cancer during the staging phase in order to improve communication between the radiologist, members of multidisciplinary teams and patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of expert radiologists, members of the Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology, was established. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the SR and to assess a level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency for each section and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. RESULTS: The final SR version was built by including n = 18 items in the "Patient Clinical Data" section, n = 7 items in the "Clinical Evaluation" section, n = 9 items in the "Imaging Protocol" section and n = 29 items in the "Report" section. Overall, 63 items were included in the final version of the SR. Both in the first and second round, all sections received a higher than good rating: a mean value of 4.6 and range 3.6-4.9 in the first round; a mean value of 5.0 and range 4.9-5 in the second round. In the first round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was a questionable 0.61. In the first round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of scores for the structured report were 4.6 (range 1-5) and 1111 (mean value 74.07, STD 4.85), respectively. In the second round, Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was an acceptable 0.70. In the second round, the overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 (range 4-5) and 1108 (mean value 79.14, STD 1.83), respectively. The overall mean score obtained by the experts in the second round was higher than the overall mean score of the first round, with a lower standard deviation value to underline greater agreement among the experts for the structured report reached in this round. CONCLUSIONS: A wide implementation of SR is of critical importance in order to offer referring physicians and patients optimum quality of service and to provide researchers with the best quality data in the context of big data exploitation of available clinical data. Implementation is a complex procedure, requiring mature technology to successfully address the multiple challenges of user-friendliness, organization and interoperability.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.

AIM: Anastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage. METHODS: The study used data from 24 Italian referral centres of the Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Patients were classified into two groups, AL (anastomotic leak) or NoAL (no anastomotic leak). The effect of patient-, disease-, treatment- and postoperative outcome-related factors on anastomotic leak after univariable and multivariable analysis was measured. RESULTS: A total of 5398 patients were included, 552 in group AL and 4846 in group NoAL. The overall incidence of leaks was 10.2%, with a mean time interval of 6.8 days. The 30-day leak-related mortality was 2.6%. Sex, body mass index, tumour location, type of approach, number of cartridges employed, weight loss, clinical T stage and combined multiorgan resection were identified as independent risk factors. The stoma did not reduce the leak rate but significantly decreased leak severity and reoperation rate. A nomogram with a risk score (RALAR score) was developed to predict anastomotic leak risk at the end of resection. CONCLUSIONS: While a defunctioning stoma did not affect the leak risk, it significantly reduced its severity. Surgeons should recognize independent risk factors for leaks at the end of rectal resection and could calculate a risk score to select high-risk patients eligible for protective stoma construction.

Association of Delayed Surgery With Oncologic Long-term Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Not Responding to Preoperative Chemoradiation.

Importance: Extending the interval between the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and surgery may enhance tumor response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. However, data on the association of delaying surgery with long-term outcome in patients who had a minor or poor response are lacking. Objective: To assess a large series of patients who had minor or no tumor response to CRT and the association of shorter or longer waiting times between CRT and surgery with short- and long-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Data from 1701 consecutive patients with rectal cancer treated in 12 Italian referral centers were analyzed for colorectal surgery between January 2000 and December 2014. Patients with a minor or null tumor response (ypT stage of 2 to 3 or ypN positive) stage greater than 0 to neoadjuvant CRT were selected for the study. The data were analyzed between March and July 2020. Exposures: Patients who had a minor or null tumor response were divided into 2 groups according to the wait time between neoadjuvant therapy end and surgery. Differences in surgical and oncological outcomes between these 2 groups were explored. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were overall and disease-free survival between the 2 groups. Results: Of a total of 1064 patients, 654 (61.5%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 64 (55-71) years. A total of 579 patients (54.4%) had a shorter wait time (8 weeks or less) 485 patients (45.6%) had a longer wait time (greater than 8 weeks). A longer waiting time before surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year overall survival rates (67.6% [95% CI, 63.1%-71.7%] vs 80.3% [95% CI, 76.5%-83.6%] at 5 years; 40.1% [95% CI, 33.5%-46.5%] vs 57.8% [95% CI, 52.1%-63.0%] at 10 years; P < .001). Also, delayed surgery was associated with worse 5- and 10-year disease-free survival (59.6% [95% CI, 54.9%-63.9%] vs 72.0% [95% CI, 67.9%-75.7%] at 5 years; 36.2% [95% CI, 29.9%-42.4%] vs 53.9% [95% CI, 48.5%-59.1%] at 10 years; P < .001). At multivariate analysis, a longer waiting time was associated with an augmented risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.50-2.26; P < .001) and death/recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.39-2.04; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, a longer interval before surgery after completing neoadjuvant CRT was associated with worse overall and disease-free survival in tumors with a poor pathological response to preoperative CRT. Based on these findings, patients who do not respond well to CRT should be identified early after the end of CRT and undergo surgery without delay.

Watch and Wait Approach for Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Treatment: The Experience of a High Volume Cancer Center.

Multimodal treatments for rectal cancer, along with significant research on predictors to response to therapy, have led to more conservative surgical strategies. We describe our experience of the rectal sparing approach in rectal cancer patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant treatment. We also specifically highlight our clinical and imaging criteria to select patients for the watch and wait strategy (w&w). Data came from 39 out of 670 patients treated for locally advanced rectal cancer between January 2016 until February 2020. The selection criteria were a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy managed with a watch and wait (w&w) strategy. A strict follow-up period was adopted in these selected patients and follow-ups were performed every three months during the first two years and every six months after that. The median follow-up time was 28 months. Six patients had a local recurrence (15.3%); all were salvageable by total mesorectal excision (TME). Five patients had a distant metastasis (12.8%). There was no local unsalvageable disease after w&w strategy. The rectal sparing approach in patients with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant treatment is the best possible treatment and is appropriate to analyze from this perspective. The watch and wait approach after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer can be successfully explored after inflexible and strict patient selection.

Organ Sparing for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Treatment Followed by Electrochemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Currently, 45-55% of rectal cancer patients receive preoperative chemo- radio-therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC). The idea of our study is to use Electrochemotherapy (ECT) before surgery, in patients with major clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy, to allow for a more conservative surgical approach. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the increase of the complete response rate after neoadjuvant treatment in LARC and to spare organ function due to total mesorectal excision (TME). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a Phase II randomized controlled trial enrolling 70 patients that will be developed in two stages. In the first step, 28 patients will be enrolled: 14 of these will receive ECT for four weeks after neo-adjuvant treatment and then local excision (treatment group) and 14 patients will receive neo-adjuvant treatment and then local excision (control group). If an increase of response rate is observed in the first stage, and/or feasibility/safety is demonstrated, the second stage of the trial will be performed, enrolling an additional 42 patients. The treatment response. in both the control arm and the treatment arm, will be assessed using the histopathological tumor regression grade on tissue specimens after local excision.