Neoadjuvant FOLFOXIRI prior to chemoradiotherapy for high-risk ("ugly") locally advanced rectal cancer: study protocol of a single-arm, multicentre, open-label, phase II trial (MEND-IT).

BACKGROUND: The presence of mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion, grade 4 extramural venous invasion (EMVI), tumour deposits (TD) or extensive or bilateral extramesorectal (lateral) lymph nodes (LLN) on MRI has been suggested to identify patients with indisputable, extensive locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), at high risk of treatment failure. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether or not intensified chemotherapy prior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy improves the complete response (CR) rate in these patients. METHODS: This multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase II trial will include 128 patients with non-metastatic high-risk LARC (hr-LARC), fit for triplet chemotherapy. To ensure a study population with indisputable, unfavourable prognostic characteristics, hr-LARC is defined as LARC with on baseline MRI at least one of the following characteristics; MRF invasion, EMVI grade 4, enlarged bilateral or extensive LLN at high risk of an incomplete resection, or TD. Exclusion criteria are the presence of a homozygous DPD deficiency, distant metastases, any chemotherapy within the past 6 months, previous radiotherapy within the pelvic area precluding standard chemoradiotherapy, and any contraindication for the planned treatment. All patients will be planned for six two-weekly cycles of FOLFOXIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) prior to chemoradiotherapy (25 × 2 Gy or 28 × 1.8 Gy with concomitant capecitabine). A resection will be performed following radiological confirmation of resectable disease after the completion of chemoradiotherapy. A watch and wait strategy is allowed in case of a clinical complete response. The primary endpoint is the CR rate, described as a pathological CR or a sustained clinical CR one year after chemoradiotherapy. The main secondary objectives are long-term oncological outcomes, radiological and pathological response, the number of resections with clear margins, treatment-related toxicity, perioperative complications, health-related costs, and quality of life. DISCUSSION: This trial protocol describes the MEND-IT study. The MEND-IT study aims to evaluate the CR rate after intensified chemotherapy prior to concomitant chemoradiotherapy in a homogeneous group of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and indisputably unfavourable characteristics, defined as hr-LARC, in order to improve their prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04838496 , registered on 02-04-2021 Netherlands Trial Register: NL9790. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 3 dd 11-4-2022.

Improved Outcomes for Responders After Treatment with Induction Chemotherapy and Chemo(re)irradiation for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in the multimodality treatment for patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), oncological outcomes remain poor. This study evaluated the effect of induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation on the pathologic response and the rate of resections with clear margins (R0 resection) in relation to long-term oncological outcomes. METHODS: All consecutive patients with LRRC treated in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven who underwent a resection after treatment with induction chemotherapy and subsequent chemo(re)irradiation between January 2010 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Induction chemotherapy consisted of CAPOX/FOLFOX. Endpoints were pathologic response, resection margin and overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), local recurrence free survival (LRFS), and metastasis free survival (MFS). RESULTS: A pathologic complete response was observed in 22 patients (17%), a "good" response (Mandard 2-3) in 74 patients (56%), and a "poor" response (Mandard 4-5) in 36 patients (27%). An R0 resection was obtained in 83 patients (63%). The degree of pathologic response was linearly correlated with the R0 resection rate (p = 0.026). In patients without synchronous metastases, pathologic response was an independent predictor for LRFS, MFS, and DFS (p = 0.004, p = 0.003, and p = 0.024, respectively), whereas R0 resection was an independent predictor for LRFS and OS (p = 0.020 and p = 0.028, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Induction chemotherapy in addition to neoadjuvant chemo(re)irradiation is a promising treatment strategy for patients with LRRC with high pathologic response rates that translate into improved oncological outcomes, especially when an R0 resection has been achieved.

Study protocols of three parallel phase 1 trials combining radical radiotherapy with the PARP inhibitor olaparib.

BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are promising novel radiosensitisers. Pre-clinical models have demonstrated potent and tumour-specific radiosensitisation by PARP inhibitors. Olaparib is a PARP inhibitor with a favourable safety profile in comparison to clinically used radiosensitisers including cisplatin when used as single agent. However, data on safety, tolerability and efficacy of olaparib in combination with radiotherapy are limited. METHODS: Olaparib is dose escalated in combination with radical (chemo-)radiotherapy regimens for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), breast cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in three parallel single institution phase 1 trials. All trials investigate a combination treatment of olaparib and radiotherapy, the NSCLC trial also investigates a triple combination of olaparib, radiotherapy and concurrent low dose cisplatin. The primary objective is to identify the maximum tolerated dose of olaparib in these combination treatments, defined as the dose closest to but not exceeding a 15% probability of dose limiting toxicity. Each trial has a separate dose limiting toxicity definition, taking into account incidence, duration and severity of expected toxicities without olaparib. Dose escalation is performed using a time-to-event continual reassessment method (TITE-CRM). TITE-CRM enables the incorporation of late onset toxicity until one year after treatment in the dose limiting toxicity definition while maintaining an acceptable trial duration. Olaparib treatment starts two days before radiotherapy and continues during weekends until two days after radiotherapy. Olaparib will also be given two weeks and one week before radiotherapy in the breast cancer trial and HNSCC trial respectively to allow for translational research. Toxicity is scored using common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4.03. Blood samples, and tumour biopsies in the breast cancer trial, are collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses. DISCUSSION: We designed three parallel phase 1 trials to assess the safety and tolerability of the PARP inhibitor olaparib in combination with radical (chemo-)radiotherapy treatment regimens. PARP inhibitors have the potential to improve outcomes in patients treated with radical (chemo-)radiotherapy, by achieving higher locoregional control rates and/or less treatment associated toxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01562210 (registered March 23, 2012), NCT02227082 (retrospectively registered August 27, 2014), NCT02229656 (registered September 1, 2014).

Analysis of re-recurrent rectal cancer after curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Substantiating data guiding clinical decision making in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is lacking, specifically in target volume (TV) definition for chemoradiotherapy (CRT). A case-by-case review of local re-recurrences (re-LRRC) after multimodal treatment for LRRC was performed, to determine location of re-LRRC and assess whether treatment could have been improved. METHODS: All patients treated with curative intent for LRRC at the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven from October 2016 onwards, in whom complete imaging of (re-)LRRC and radiotherapy was available, were retrieved. Patients were discussed in plenary meetings with expert colorectal surgeons, radiation oncologists and radiologists. Each case was classified based on re-LRRC location, whether it was in accordance with the (current) radiotherapy protocol, and whether multimodal management would have been different in retrospect. RESULTS: Thirty-three cases were discussed. LRRC treatment was deemed suboptimal in 17/33 patients, due to different target volumes (13/17) and/or different surgery (9/17). 15/33 (46 %) of re-LRRC developed in-field of the prior radiotherapy TV, possibly showing RT-resistant disease. Other re-LRRCs developed out-field (n = 5, 15 %), marginally (n = 6, 18 %), or in a combined fashion (n = 7, 21 %). In retrospect, 48 % of cases were irradiated in line with current TV recommendations. TVs of 13/33 cases would have been altered if irradiated today. CONCLUSION: This study highlights room for improvement within current standard-ofcare treatment for LRRC. Different surgical management or TVs may have improved outcome in up to half of discussed cases. Further delineation guideline development, incorporating the results from this study, may improve oncological outcome, specifically local control, for LRRC patients.

Evolution of clinical nature, treatment and survival of locally recurrent rectal cancer: Comparative analysis of two national cross-sectional cohorts.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer declined after guideline revision in 2014. This decline is thought to affect the clinical nature and treatability of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Therefore, this study compared two national cross-sectional cohorts before and after the guideline revision with the aim to determine the changes in treatment and survival of LRRC patients over time. METHODS: Patients who underwent resection of primary rectal cancer in 2011 (n = 2094) and 2016 (n = 2855) from two nationwide cohorts with a 4-year follow up were included. Main outcomes included time to LRRC, synchronous metastases at time of LRRC diagnosis, intention of treatment and 2-year overall survival after LRRC. RESULTS: Use of neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for the primary tumour decreased from 88.5% to 60.0% from 2011 to 2016. The 3-year LRRC rate was not significantly different with 5.1% in 2011 (n = 114, median time to LRRC 16 months) and 6.3% in 2016 (n = 202, median time to LRRC 16 months). Synchronous metastasis rate did not significantly differ (27.2% vs 33.7%, p = 0.257). Treatment intent of the LRRC shifted towards more curative treatment (30.4% vs. 47.0%, p = 0.009). In the curatively treated group, two-year overall survival after LRRC diagnoses increased from 47.5% to 78.7% (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Primary rectal cancer patients in 2016 were treated less often with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, while LRRC rates remained similar. Those who developed LRRC were more often candidate for curative intent treatment compared to the 2011 cohort, and survival after curative intent treatment also improved substantially.

Improved response rate in patients with prognostically poor locally advanced rectal cancer after treatment with induction chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy when compared with chemoradiotherapy alone: A matched case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: The addition of induction chemotherapy (ICT) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has the potential to improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, patient selection is essential to prevent overtreatment. This study compared the complete response (CR) rate after treatment with and without ICT of LARC patients with prognostically poor characteristics. METHODS: All LARC patients who were treated with neoadjuvant CRT, whether or not preceded by ICT, and who underwent surgery or were considered for a wait-and-see strategy between January 2016 and March 2020 in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, were retrospectively selected. LARC was defined as any T4 tumour, or a T2/T3 tumour with extramural venous invasion and/or tumour deposits and/or N2 lymph node status, and/or mesorectal fascia involvement (T3 tumours only). Case-control matching was performed based on the aforementioned characteristics. RESULTS: Of 242 patients, 178 (74%) received CRT (CRT-group) and 64 patients (26%) received ICT followed by CRT (ICT-group). In the ICT-group, 3 patients (5%) did not receive the minimum of three cycles. In addition, in this selected cohort, compliance with radiotherapy was 100% in the ICT-group and 97% in the CRT-group. The CR rate was 30% in the ICT-group and 15% in the CRT-group (p = 0.011). After case-control matching, the CR rate was 28% and 9%, respectively (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Treatment including ICT seemed well tolerated and resulted in a high CR rate. Hence, this treatment strategy may facilitate organ preservation and improve survival in LARC patients with prognostically poor characteristics.

Complete metabolic remission of an irresectable mediastinal solitary fibrous tumour with concurrent chemoradiation.

Solitary fibrous tumour is a rare mesenchymal tumour of uncertain origin that occurs most frequently in the pleura, although it has also been described in extraserosal sites. The biological behaviour of the tumour is unpredictable. The case history is described of a patient diagnosed with a large symptomatic irresectable mediastinal solitary fibrous tumour who achieved a clinical, radiological and metabolic response after concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy.