Oncological risks associated with the planned watch-and-wait strategy using total neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer: A narrative review.

Overall survival benefit of total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) remains unconfirmed. Thus, in our opinion, the main rationale for using TNT is a planned watch-and-wait (w&w) strategy to improve patients' long-term quality of life through organ preservation. The OPRA randomized trial, which examined a planned w&w strategy using TNT, showed a higher organ preservation rate but also a higher regrowth rate compared to studies on the opportunistic w&w strategy. Higher rates of complete clinical response with TNT did not improve disease-free survival compared to historical controls. Therefore, the gain in organ-sparing capability might not be balanced by the increased oncological risk. The ultimate local failure rate in the intention-to-treat analysis of the OPRA trial was 13% for induction chemotherapy and 16% for consolidation chemotherapy, which seems higher than expected compared to 8% in a meta-analysis of w&w studies or 12% after TNT and surgery in the PRODIGE-23 and RAPIDO trials, which enrolled patients with more advanced cancers than the OPRA trial. Other studies also suggest worse local control when surgery is delayed for radio-chemoresistant cancers. Our review questions the safety of the planned w&w strategy using TNT in unselected patients. To reduce the oncological risk while maintaining high organ preservation rates, we suggest that the planned w&w strategy using TNT requires a two-tier patient selection process: before treatment and after tumor response assessment at the midpoint of consolidation chemotherapy. These robust selections should identify patients who are unlikely to achieve organ preservation with TNT and would be better managed by preoperative chemoradiotherapy (without consolidation chemotherapy) and surgery, or by discontinuing consolidation chemotherapy and proceeding directly to surgery.

Multivariable prognostic modelling to improve prediction of colorectal cancer recurrence: the PROSPeCT trial.

OBJECTIVE: Improving prognostication to direct personalised therapy remains an unmet need. This study prospectively investigated promising CT, genetic, and immunohistochemical markers to improve the prediction of colorectal cancer recurrence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicentre trial (ISRCTN 95037515) recruited patients with primary colorectal cancer undergoing CT staging from 13 hospitals. Follow-up identified cancer recurrence and death. A baseline model for cancer recurrence at 3 years was developed from pre-specified clinicopathological variables (age, sex, tumour-node stage, tumour size, location, extramural venous invasion, and treatment). Then, CT perfusion (blood flow, blood volume, transit time and permeability), genetic (RAS, RAF, and DNA mismatch repair), and immunohistochemical markers of angiogenesis and hypoxia (CD105, vascular endothelial growth factor, glucose transporter protein, and hypoxia-inducible factor) were added to assess whether prediction improved over tumour-node staging alone as the main outcome measure. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-six of 448 participants formed the final cohort (226 male; mean 66 ± 10 years. 227 (70%) had ≥ T3 stage cancers; 151 (46%) were node-positive; 81 (25%) developed subsequent recurrence. The sensitivity and specificity of staging alone for recurrence were 0.56 [95% CI: 0.44, 0.67] and 0.58 [0.51, 0.64], respectively. The baseline clinicopathologic model improved specificity (0.74 [0.68, 0.79], with equivalent sensitivity of 0.57 [0.45, 0.68] for high vs medium/low-risk participants. The addition of prespecified CT perfusion, genetic, and immunohistochemical markers did not improve prediction over and above the clinicopathologic model (sensitivity, 0.58-0.68; specificity, 0.75-0.76). CONCLUSION: A multivariable clinicopathological model outperformed staging in identifying patients at high risk of recurrence. Promising CT, genetic, and immunohistochemical markers investigated did not further improve prognostication in rigorous prospective evaluation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A prognostic model based on clinicopathological variables including age, sex, tumour-node stage, size, location, and extramural venous invasion better identifies colorectal cancer patients at high risk of recurrence for neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy than stage alone. KEY POINTS: Identification of colorectal cancer patients at high risk of recurrence is an unmet need for treatment personalisation. This model for recurrence, incorporating many patient variables, had higher specificity than staging alone. Continued optimisation of risk stratification schema will help individualise treatment plans and follow-up schedules.

Early Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Rectal Cancer Trials: Surrogacy Revisited.

Trial-level surrogacy is critical before early response endpoints are used to approve new therapies.

pCR and 2-Year Disease-Free Survival: A Combination of the Two Endpoints as a New Classification for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients-An Updated Pooled Analysis of Eleven International Randomized Trials.

LARC is managed by multimodal treatments whose intensity can be highly modulated. In this context, we need surrogate endpoints to help predict long-term outcomes and better personalize treatments. A previous study identified 2yDFS as a stronger predictor of OS than pCR in LARC patients undergoing neoadjuvant RT. The aim of this pooled analysis was to assess the role of pCR and 2yDFS as surrogate endpoints for OS in a larger cohort. The pooled and subgroup analyses were performed on large rectal cancer randomized trial cohorts who received long-course RT. Our analysis focused on the evaluation of OS in relation to the pCR and 2-year disease status. A total of 4600 patients were analyzed. Four groups were identified according to intermediate outcomes: 12% had both pCR and 2yDFS (the better); 67% achieved 2yDFS but not pCR (the good); 1% had pCR but not 2yDFS; and 20% had neither pCR nor 2yDFS (the bad). The pCR and 2yDFS were favorably associated with OS in the univariate analysis, and 2yDFS maintained a statistically significant association in the multivariate analysis independently of the pCR status. The combination of the pCR and 2yDFS results in a strong predictor of OS, whereas failure to achieve 2yDFS carries a poor prognosis regardless of the pCR status. This new stratification of LARC patients could help design predictive models where the combination of 2yDFS and pCR should be employed as the primary outcome.

Selecting a TNT Schedule in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Can We Predict Who Actually Benefits?

Many consider the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) to be preoperative chemoradiotherapy, radical surgery involving a total mesorectal excision, and post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy based on the pathology of the specimen. The poor impact on distant control is a major limitation of this strategy, with metastasis rates remaining in the 25-35% range and recovery after radical surgery leading to reluctance with prescription and inconsistent patient compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy. A second limitation is the low rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) (around 10-15%) despite multiple efforts to potentiate preoperative chemoradiation regimens, which in turn means it is less effective at achieving non-operative management (NOM). Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) is a pragmatic approach to solving these problems by introducing systemic chemotherapy at an early timepoint. Enthusiasm for delivering TNT for patients with LARC is increasing in light of the results of published randomized phase III trials, which show a doubling of the pCR rate and a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent metastases. However, there has been no demonstrated improvement in quality of life or overall survival. A plethora of potential chemotherapy schedules are available around the radiotherapy component, which include preoperative induction or consolidation with a range of options (FOLFOXIRI, FOLFOX, or CAPEOX,) and a varying duration of 6-18 weeks, prior to long course chemoradiation (LCCRT) or consolidation NACT following short-course preoperative radiation therapy (SCPRT) using 5 × 5 Gy or LCCRT using 45-60 Gy, respectively. The need to maintain optimal local control is a further important factor, and preliminary data appear to indicate that the RT schedule remains a crucial issue, especially in more advanced tumors, i.e., mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion. Thus, there is no consensus as to the optimum combination, sequence, or duration of TNT. The selection of patients most likely to benefit is challenging, as clear-cut criteria to individuate patients benefiting from TNT are lacking. In this narrative review, we examine if there are any necessary or sufficient criteria for the use of TNT. We explore potential selection for the individual and their concerns with a generalized use of this strategy.

AN0025, a novel antagonist of PGE2-receptor E-type 4 (EP4), in combination with total neoadjuvant treatment of advanced rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of AN0025 in combination with preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in either short course (SCRT) or long course radiotherapy (LCRT) settings for those with locally advanced rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight subjects with locally advanced rectal cancer participated in this multicenter, open-label, Phase Ib trial. Enrolled subjects received either 250 mg or 500 mg of AN0025 once daily for 10 weeks with either LCRT or SCRT with chemotherapy (7 subjects/group). Participants were assessed for safety/efficacy starting from the first dose of study drug administration and were followed for 2 years. RESULTS: No treatment-emergent adverse or serious adverse events meeting dose-limiting criteria were observed, with only 3 subjects discontinuing AN0025 treatment due to adverse events. Twenty-five of 28 subjects completed 10 weeks of AN0025 and adjuvant therapy and were evaluated for efficacy. Overall, 36.0% of subjects (9/25 subjects) achieved a pathological complete response or a complete clinical response, including 26.7% of subjects (4/15 subjects who underwent surgery) who achieved a pathological complete response. A total of 65.4% of subjects had magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed down-staging ≤ stage 3 following completion of treatment. With a median follow-up of 30 months. The 12-month disease-free survival and overall survival were 77.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 56.6, 89.2) and 96.3% (95% CI: 76.5, 99.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with AN0025 administered for 10 weeks along with preoperative SCRT or LCRT did not appear to worsen the toxicity in subjects with locally advanced rectal cancer, was well-tolerated and showed promise in inducing both a pathological and complete clinical response. These findings suggest its activity deserves further investigation in larger clinical trials.

Radiotherapy dose escalation using endorectal brachytherapy in elderly and frail patients with rectal cancer unsuitable for surgery: Lessons from studies in fit patients and future perspectives.

Epidemiological data indicate that more than 50 % of patients with newly-diagnosed rectal cancer are older than 70 years, with rising numbers expected over the next decades. Treatment decision-making is challenging in elderly and frail patients with rectal cancer, whereas standardized treatment guidelines for this patient cohort are lacking. Elderly and frail rectal cancer patients are often considered by surgeons as unfit to undergo radical surgery as the risk of surgical complications and postoperative mortality rises with increasing age and comorbidity. Furthermore, these patients often receive no treatment at all, resulting in local and/or systemic disease progression with associated symptoms and impaired quality of life (QoL). Recent data from randomized trials in young fit patients with early stage rectal cancer indicate that RT dose escalation can be safely delivered using external beam (chemo)radiotherapy (EBRT) followed by endoluminal radiotherapeutic modalities, such as contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) or high-dose rate endorectal brachytherapy (HDR-BT). However, prospective studies testing this therapeutic concept in elderly and frail patients remain limited. Here, we review the current evidence in the epidemiology and the management of elderly and frail patients with rectal cancer. We summarize the potential of RT dose escalation to achieve long-term local control of the primary tumour, prevent disease-related morbidity, improve QoL and even organ preservation. Future perspectives and open questions will be discussed as well.

Spend less to achieve more: Economic analysis of intermittent versus continuous cetuximab in KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the COIN-B clinical trial demonstrated that intermittent cetuximab (IC) was a safe alternative to continuous cetuximab (CC), with less cytotoxic chemotherapy, in first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Cetuximab has been available for this indication in England since 2015, but treatment breaks beyond 6 weeks were prohibited, despite real-world evidence that therapy de-escalation maintains equivalent disease control, but with superior Quality-of-Life (QoL). We performed health economic analyses of IC versus CC and used this evidence to help underpin policy change and guide clinical practice through reduction in unnecessary treatment for mCRC patients. METHODS: Employing cost-minimization analysis, we conducted partitioned survival modelling (PSM) and Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) simulation to determine costs and quality-adjusted-life-years for IC versus CC. RESULTS: IC reduced costs by £â€¯35,763 (PSM; p < 0.001) or £â€¯30,189 (MCMC) per patient annually, while preserving treatment efficacy and enhancing QoL. Extrapolating to all mCRC patients eligible for cetuximab therapy would have generated cost savings of ~£â€¯1.2 billion over this cohort's lifetime. These data helped underpin a request to NHS England to remove treatment break restrictions in first-line mCRC therapy, which has been adopted as an interim treatment option policy in colorectal cancer during the Covid-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight substantial cost savings achievable by treatment de-escalation, while also reinforcing the importance of therapy breaks to potentially increase tumour responsiveness and reduce treatment toxicity. Our study also highlights how health economic evidence can influence health policy, championing reduced treatment intensity approaches without compromising patient outcomes, which is of particular relevance when addressing the reduced capacity and treatment backlogs experienced during the pandemic.

Bayesian network structure for predicting local tumor recurrence in rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery.

Background and Purpose: Tumor recurrence, a characteristic of malignant tumors, is the biggest concern for rectal cancer survivors. The epidemiology of the disease calls for a pressing need to improve healthcare quality and patient outcomes. Prediction models such as Bayesian networks, which can probabilistically reason under uncertainty, could assist caregivers with patient management. However, some concerns are associated with the standard approaches to developing these structures in medicine. Therefore, this study aims to compare Bayesian network structures that stem from these two techniques. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 6754 locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients enrolled in 14 international clinical trials. Local tumor recurrence at 2, 3, and 5-years was defined as the endpoints of interest. Five rectal cancer treating physicians from three countries elicited the expert structure. The algorithmic structure was inferred from the data with the hill-climbing algorithm. Structural performance was assessed with calibration plots and area under the curve values. Results: The area under the curve for the expert structure on the training and validation data was above 0.9 and 0.8, respectively, for all the time points. However, the algorithmic structure had superior predictive performance over the expert structure for all time points of interest. Conclusion: We have developed and internally validated a Bayesian networks structure from experts' opinions, which can predict the risk of a LARC patient developing a tumor recurrence at 2, 3, and 5 years. Our result shows that the algorithmic-based structures are more performant and less interpretable than expert-based structures.

Compliance to chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinoma of the anus.

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) remains the preferred design to determine effectiveness of a novel intervention in patients with cancer. The accepted method of primary analysis of phase III trials of radical chemoradiotherapy is by intention to treat (ITT). Yet, investigators often resort to 'post hoc' analyses comparing only patients who received the treatment per protocol (PP). Analysis of treatment PP aims to maintain the comparable groups achieved by randomisation, whilst identifying a true or more accurate treatment effect if the planned chemoradiotherapy is optimally applied with full compliance. Poor compliance is recognised to be associated with inferior outcomes. Reasons for poor compliance if identified and understood, might influence the design of future trials. Yet this entire methodology risks substantial bias and is often disparaged. In localised squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) chemoradiotherapy with concurrent 5-flurouracil (or capecitabine) and mitomycin C achieves high rates of local control, but results in substantial acute toxicities. Some novel radiotherapy techniques (intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), meticulous organs-at-risk (OAR) contouring, and techniques such as sparing of PET-active bone marrow) appear to reduce acute toxicity. Good quality assurance in the design of trials, patient education, optimizing nutrition, proactive surveillance during treatment, and early interventions might also improve compliance. This review examines the recently published findings on compliance in the ACT II trial and data from other studies using chemoradiotherapy in SCCA to explore compliance.

The Evolving Neoadjuvant Treatment Paradigm for Patients with Locoregional mismatch Repair Proficient Rectal Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: The standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has included preoperative chemoradiation, total mesorectal excision surgery and post operative adjuvant chemotherapy based on histopathology. The current therapeutic landscape in LARC has many different options with different directions of travel - depending on the goal of treatment. Enthusiasm for delivering total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is increasing in the light of recently published randomised phase III trials - RAPIDO and PRODIGE-23. There is a wide diversity of different potential schedules and a multitude of approaches, which include induction neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with a range of chemotherapy options (CAPEOX, FOLFOX, FOLFOXIRI) and a varying duration of 6-18 weeks, or consolidation NACT. These schedules either precede or follow short-course preoperative radiation therapy (SCPRT) using 5 × 5Gy or long-course chemoradiation (LCCRT) using 45-60Gy respectively. The different strategies of induction and consolidation neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been compared and have similar long-term outcomes, but consolidation chemotherapy may facilitate organ-sparing. The results are driving novel paradigms with both intensification and de-intensification treatment strategies. The ideal combination, sequence or duration of such a TNT approach remains undefined. As yet, there are no robust clinical, genetic, molecular, immune or imaging features (alone or integrated), which either direct or aid these choices. Currently, the selection of neoadjuvant treatment is driven by the impact on avoidance or feasibility of surgery or reducing the risk of metastases rather than prevention of local recurrence. Most believe that TNT will improve overall survival, despite the present lack of evidence. Both the inherent heterogeneity in LARC and the observed range of different responses underline the need for response biomarkers to individually tailor therapy rather than 'a one size fits all' approach.

International consensus recommendations on key outcome measures for organ preservation after (chemo)radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer.

Multimodal treatment strategies for patients with rectal cancer are increasingly including the possibility of organ preservation, through nonoperative management or local excision. Organ preservation strategies can enable patients with a complete response or near-complete clinical responses after radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy to safely avoid the morbidities associated with radical surgery, and thus to maintain anorectal function and quality of life. However, standardization of the key outcome measures of organ preservation strategies is currently lacking; this includes a lack of consensus of the optimal definitions and selection of primary end points according to the trial phase and design; the optimal time points for response assessment; response-based decision-making; follow-up schedules; use of specific anorectal function tests; and quality of life and patient-reported outcomes. Thus, a consensus statement on outcome measures is necessary to ensure consistency and facilitate more accurate comparisons of data from ongoing and future trials. Here, we have convened an international group of experts with extensive experience in the management of patients with rectal cancer, including organ preservation approaches, and used a Delphi process to establish the first international consensus recommendations for key outcome measures of organ preservation, in an attempt to standardize the reporting of data from both trials and routine practice in this emerging area.

Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy with consolidation chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Short-course radiotherapy with consolidation chemotherapy (SCRT-CCT) has emerged as a promising alternative to the long course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) regimen in locally advanced rectal cancer management. The systematic review and meta-analysis is aimed at summarizing current evidence on SCRT-CCT and comparing it to LCRT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic databases of MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library were searched using a predefined search strategy returning 3314 articles. This review included 11 studies (6 randomized trials and 5 non-randomized studies) on SCRT-CCT regimen based on seven different cohorts. Weighted arithmetic means and forest plots were generated to determine summary estimates. RESULTS: The probability of achieving pathological complete response (pCR) was higher with SCRT-CCT compared to LCRT (risk ratio [RR] = 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-2.19). No statistically significant difference in 3-year overall survival (OS) was observed between the two groups (RR= 1.06, 95% CI: 0.98-1.14). The weighted arithmetic mean of 3-year OS and pCR was 83.6% versus 80.9%, and 24.5% versus 13.6% for SCRT-CCT and LCRT, respectively. R0 resection and T-downstaging rates ranged from 69.2-100% to 47-75% for SCRT-CCT, and 71-92.3% and 41-75% for LCRT, respectively. The regimens had similar compliance, postoperative, and late toxicity, however, acute toxicity rates varied primarily due to differences in treatment protocols. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the ability of SCRT-CCT to produce improved tumor response with comparable OS, R0 resection, and T-downstaging at the cost of increased acute toxicity. However, heterogeneity in treatment protocols across studies makes it difficult to provide definitive conclusions regarding the regimen. Several ongoing trials are expected to provide further evidence confirming the findings of RAPIDO trial and detail appropriate SCRT-CCT protocols to improve oncological outcomes, minimize toxicity, and determine its effectiveness as the standard-of-care for locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

The concept and use of the neoadjuvant rectal score as a composite endpoint in rectal cancer.

There is no universally accepted instrument to use as a validated surrogate endpoint for overall survival in phase 2 and phase 3 multimodal rectal cancer trials using chemoradiotherapy. Efforts are hampered by the inaccuracy of clinical TNM staging, the variability of indications for neoadjuvant treatment, and diverse definitions of tumour regression grade. Pathological complete response is commonly used, but fails to capture information from the majority of patients. The neoadjuvant rectal score categorises response and downstaging from the entire trial population to identify whether or not a novel treatment group in a chemoradiation trial is superior by predicting overall survival outcomes. Additionally, the neoadjuvant rectal score assesses the difference between initial clinical and pathological T stage and the presence or absence of nodal involvement after treatment. The neoadjuvant rectal score has been conceptually, but incompletely, statistically validated by two independent trial datasets. However, a fundamental weakness of the score is that no preoperative phase 3 trials in locally advanced rectal cancer in the past 20 years have provided a significant benefit in overall survival to statistically validate the neoadjuvant rectal score as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival. We review the robustness, practical value, applicability, generalisability, advantages, and disadvantages of the neoadjuvant rectal score as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival and recommend how this score could be improved and be acceptable as a standard endpoint in studies investigating neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation in patients with rectal cancer.

Outcome measures in multimodal rectal cancer trials.

There is a large variability regarding the definition and choice of primary endpoints in phase 2 and phase 3 multimodal rectal cancer trials, resulting in inconsistency and difficulty of data interpretation. Also, surrogate properties of early and intermediate endpoints have not been systematically assessed. We provide a comprehensive review of clinical and surrogate endpoints used in trials for non-metastatic rectal cancer. The applicability, advantages, and disadvantages of these endpoints are summarised, with recommendations on clinical endpoints for the different phase trials, including limited surgery or non-operative management for organ preservation. We discuss how early and intermediate endpoints, including patient-reported outcomes and involvement of patients in decision making, can be used to guide trial design and facilitate consistency in reporting trial results in rectal cancer.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the treatment of squamous cell anal canal cancer: acute and early-late toxicity, outcome, and efficacy.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively review our experience on 84 patients with squamous cell anal canal cancer (SCAC) within 12 months after combined treatment with intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), in terms of acute and early-late toxicity, overall treatment time and interruptions, colostomy-free survival (CFS), and tumor response. METHODS: Acute gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary (GU), and cutaneous (CU) toxicities were assessed according to Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03. Early-late toxicity was scored using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) late radiation morbidity scoring system. Tumor response was evaluated with response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) v1.1. RESULTS: Acute toxicity for 84 subjects (100%): severe (≥ G3) GI and skin toxicity was observed in 4 (5%) and 19 patients (23%), respectively. Early-late toxicity for 73 subjects (87%): severe (≥ G3) GI and vulvo-vaginal toxicity was observed in 2 (3%) and 2 (3%) patients, respectively. No acute or early-late severe GU toxicity was reported. A treatment interruption occurred in 65 patients (77%). CFS was 96% (95% CI 89-99) at 6 months and 92% (95% CI 83-96) at 12 months. At 6 months complete response (CR), partial response (PR) and progressive disease (PD) was observed in 70 (83%), 3 (4%), and 7 patients (8%), respectively. At 12 months, CR was observed in 60 patients (81%); eleven patients (15%) experienced PD. CONCLUSION: Our study showed an excellent clinical result and very low acute toxicity rates, confirming the IMRT as standard of care for curative treatment of anal cancer patients. The current trial was registered with the number IEO N87/11.