Update on Dosing and Fractionation for Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy for Localized Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

OPINION STATEMENT: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) over 5-6 weeks with daily doses of 1.8-2.0 Gy to a total dose of 50-50.4 Gy is standard of care for localized high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the extremities and trunk wall. One exception is myxoid liposarcomas where the phase II DOREMY trial applying a preoperative dose of 36 Gy in 2 Gy fractions (3-4 weeks treatment) has achieved excellent local control rates of 100% after a median follow-up of 25 months.Hypofractionated preoperative RT has been investigated in a number of phase II single-arm studies suggesting that daily doses of 2.75-8 Gy over 1-3 weeks can achieve similar oncological outcomes to conventional neoadjuvant RT. Prospective data with direct head-to-head comparison to conventional neoadjuvant RT investigating oncological outcomes and toxicity profiles is eagerly awaited.For the entire group of retroperitoneal sarcomas, RT is not the standard of care. The randomized multi-center STRASS trial did not find a benefit in abdominal recurrence-free survival by the addition of preoperative RT. However, for the largest histological subgroup of well-differentiated and grades I and II dedifferentiated liposarcomas, the STRASS trial and the post-hoc propensity-matched STREXIT analysis have identified a possible benefit in survival by preoperative RT. These patients deserve to be informed about the pros and cons of preoperative RT while the longer follow-up data from the STRASS trial is awaited.

Supportive care interventions for managing gastrointestinal symptoms following treatment for colorectal cancer: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is prevalent in the developed world, with unhealthy lifestyles and diet contributing to rising incidence. Advances in effective screening, diagnosis, and treatments have led to improved survival rates, but CRC survivors suffer poorer long-term gastrointestinal consequences than the general population. However, the current state of clinical practice around provision of health services and treatment options remains unclear. PURPOSE: We aimed to identify what supportive care interventions are available to manage gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms for CRC survivors. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from 2000 to April 2022 for resources, services, programs, or interventions to address GI symptoms and functional outcomes in CRC. We extracted information about characteristics of supportive care interventions, the study design, and sample characteristics from included studies, and performed a narrative synthesis RESULTS: Of 3807 papers retrieved, seven met the eligibility criteria. Types of interventions for managing or improving GI symptoms included two rehabilitation, one exercise, one educational, one dietary, and one pharmacological. Pelvic floor muscle exercise may help to resolve GI symptoms more quickly in the post-operative recovery phase. Survivors may also benefit from rehabilitation programs through improved self-management strategies, especially administered soon after completing primary treatment. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Despite a high prevalence and burden of GI symptoms post-treatment, there is limited evidence for supportive care interventions to help manage or alleviate these symptoms. More, large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to identify effective interventions for managing GI symptoms that occur post-treatment.

How consequences of colorectal cancer treatment are managed: a qualitative study of stakeholder experiences about supportive care and current practices.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors experience treatment-effects such as symptoms and functional impairments. There is limited evidence about how these are managed and what services or supports are available in the community. We aimed to identify current practice and available supports for managing consequences of treatment from clinician and CRC survivor perspectives. METHODS: This qualitative study, informed by an interpretivist constructionist paradigm, included semi-structured interviews. Clinicians with experience of treating CRC patients and adult CRC survivors were recruited across Australia. Interviews explored experiences about problems experienced after CRC treatment and how these were managed. Data collection and analysis, using thematic analysis, was iterative whereby emergent themes during analysis were incorporated into subsequent interviews. RESULTS: We interviewed 16 clinicians and 18 survivors. Survivors experienced a range of consequences of treatment amendable to support including allied health, information, and self-management. Barriers to support access included clinicians' worry about patient out-of-pocket expenses, long waitlists, lack of awareness about existing supports, and perception no therapeutic options were available. Healthcare professionals with expertise in CRC were often difficult to identify outside of cancer settings. Survivorship care could be improved with individualised timely information and identification of pathways to access healthcare providers with expertise in managing consequences of CRC treatment within primary care. CONCLUSIONS: To improve CRC survivor lives posttreatment, routine assessment of consequences of treatment, individualised care planning involving relevant healthcare professionals, access to supportive care when needed, and improved information provision and engagement of a range of health professionals in follow-up care are needed.

Best clinical management of tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT): A consensus paper from the community of experts.

Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is a rare, locally aggressive, mesenchymal tumor arising from the joints, bursa and tendon sheaths. TGCT comprises a nodular- and a diffuse-type, with the former exhibiting mostly indolent course and the latter a locally aggressive behavior. Although usually not life-threatening, TGCT may cause chronic pain and adversely impact function and quality of life (QoL). CSFR1 inhibitors are effective with benefit on symptoms and QoL but are not available in most countries. The degree of uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate therapy and the lack of guidelines on the clinical management of TGCT make the adoption of new treatments inconsistent across the world, with suboptimal outcomes for patients. A global consensus meeting was organized in June 2022, involving experts from several disciplines and patient representatives from SPAGN to define the best evidence-based practice for the optimal approach to TGCT and generate the recommendations presented herein.

Treatment Strategies for Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a diverse group of rare tumors of mesenchymal origin with different clinical, histologic and molecular characteristics [...].

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for colorectal and anal cancer: the extent of recommendations for managing long-term symptoms and functional impairments.

PURPOSE: Due to increasing numbers of colorectal and anal cancer survivors, more individuals are living with long-term symptoms after treatment. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the extent to which practice guidelines for colorectal and anal cancer provide recommendations for managing long-term symptoms and functioning impairments. METHODS: Four electronic databases and websites of 30 international cancer societies were searched for clinical practice guidelines, consensus statements, or best practice recommendations for colorectal or anal cancer. Quality of included guidelines was evaluated with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II tool. Results were narratively summarized. RESULTS: We included 51 guidelines or consensus statements. Recommendations for managing long-term symptoms or functioning impairments were reported in 13 guidelines (25.4%). All 13 recommend a healthy lifestyle, diet, body weight, and physical activity. The ASCO Colorectal Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is the most comprehensive, including interventions targeting sexual and bowel function to pain and cognitive issues, and also highlights limited evidence for informing management strategies. Other guidelines recommend treating incontinence, chronic diarrhea, and distress, and stress the need for greater awareness for sexual dysfunction, survivorship clinics, and referrals to specific supportive care interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinical practice guidelines include recommendations for managing long-term symptoms and functioning impairments. It is unclear if this is due to limited evidence or absence of management strategies and interventions. Clear recommendations for managing long-term symptoms and functioning to help health professionals in supporting colorectal and anal cancer survivors are needed.

Long-Term Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Short-Course and Long-Course (Chemo) Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Both preoperative short-course radiotherapy (SC-PRT) and preoperative long-course chemo radiotherapy (CRT) have shown to reduce local recurrence rates after total mesorectal excision (TME), but neither resulted in improved survival. This study compared the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL) and symptoms between CRT and SC-PRT. METHODS: Patients who were preoperatively treated with a total dose of 50.0 to 50.4 Gy for locally advanced rectal cancers were identified from 2 hospital registries. Starting from 2011, all patients who were disease-free in the study population (n = 105) were sent a HRQL-questionnaire composed of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and questions on bowel and urinary function. Patients who underwent SC-PRT in the TME trial were used as a reference group. RESULTS: HRQL results from 85 patients receiving CRT (81.0%), with a median follow-up time of 58 months, were compared with the results of patients who underwent SC-PRT (n = 306). Apart from more nausea and vomiting reported by patients receiving CRT (mean score for CRT 5.9 vs. 1.3 for SC-PRT; P < .01; not clinically relevant) and less satisfaction with urinary function indicated by patients who received CRT (mean score for CRT 71.2 vs. 81.2 for SC-PRT; P < .01), no significant differences were found in HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of HRQL in patients who received CRT shows no clinically relevant differences in long-term HRQL and symptoms between patients who received CRT and SC-PRT, apart from less satisfaction with urinary function reported by patients who received CRT. These results indicate that both approaches have a comparable impact on long-term HRQL.

A comprehensive longitudinal overview of health-related quality of life and symptoms after treatment for rectal cancer in the TME trial.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) combined with preoperative short-term radiotherapy (PRT) reduces local recurrence rates in rectal cancer treatment. However, treatment with radiotherapy increased morbidity and did not result in a longer survival. The aim of this analysis is to provide a comprehensive longitudinal overview of the health-related quality of life (HRQL) and symptoms experienced by rectal cancer patients in the Dutch randomized TME trial from baseline until 14 years after treatment. METHODS: Rectal cancer patients (n =1530) were randomly allocated to PRT (5 × 5 Gy) followed by TME or to TME alone. At baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, 5 years and 14 years after treatment HRQL was evaluated in surviving patients (n =606, at 14 years after treatment). RESULTS: None of the general symptoms differed significantly between PRT + TME and TME. However, in both treatment arms the general symptoms were increased at the diagnosis of rectal cancer, after surgery and by aging. With PRT + TME bowel symptoms were increased, specifically more fecal incontinence was reported at all time points, resulting in more use of pads for fecal incontinence (PRT + TME vs. TME at 5 years 51.5% vs. 30.5%, respectively, and at 14 years 56.4% vs. 37.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal analysis shows that general symptoms in both groups are increased at the diagnosis of rectal cancer, after surgery and by aging, but not by RT. However, irradiated patients reported more bowel dysfunction at all time points.

Bowel function 14 years after preoperative short-course radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated very long-term bowel function after total mesorectal excision (TME) with or without preoperative short-course radiotherapy (PRT) for rectal cancer, the risk factors for bowel dysfunction, and the association of bowel dysfunction with health-related quality of life (HRQL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the TME trial (1996-1999), 1530 Dutch patients with rectal cancer were randomized to TME preceded by 5 × 5 Gy PRT or TME alone. A set of questionnaires was sent to the surviving patients (n = 583) in 2012. The questionnaires included the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS score), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Colorectal Module (EORTC QLQ-CR29). The LARS score range was divided into "no LARS," "minor LARS," and "major LARS" categories in ascending severity of bowel dysfunction. The potential risk factors for major LARS were tested on multivariable analysis. The HRQL was compared between the LARS score categories. RESULTS: Of the 478 respondents, 242 nonstoma patients were included in the present analysis. The median interval since treatment was 14.6 years, and the median age at the follow-up point was 75 years. Major LARS was reported by 46% of all patients (56% PRT plus TME vs. 35% TME). PRT (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 99% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.9) and age ≤ 75 years at the follow-up point (OR, 2.4; 99% CI, 1.1-5.5) increased the risk of major LARS. Gender, tumor height, anastomotic leakage, type of anastomosis, interval since treatment, and comorbid diabetes were not significant. Patients with major LARS fared worse in many HRQL domains (P < .01; score difference > 5% of score range). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of nonstoma patients endured major LARS years after TME. PRT and age ≤ 75 years at follow-up pose further risks of major LARS in addition to surgery. Major LARS is associated with reduced HRQL.

No Increased Risk of Second Cancer After Radiotherapy in Patients Treated for Rectal or Endometrial Cancer in the Randomized TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 Trials.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the long-term probability of developing a second cancer in a large pooled cohort of patients treated with surgery with or without radiotherapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All second cancers diagnosed in patients included in the TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 trials were analyzed. In the TME trial, patients with rectal cancer (n = 1,530) were randomly allocated to preoperative external-beam RT (EBRT; 25 Gy in five fractions) or no RT. In the PORTEC trials, patients with endometrial cancer were randomly assigned to postoperative EBRT (46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions) versus no RT (PORTEC-1; n = 714) or EBRT versus vaginal brachytherapy (VBT; PORTEC-2; n = 427). RESULTS: A total of 2,554 patients were analyzed (median follow-up, 13.0 years; range 1.8 to 21.2 years). No differences were found in second cancer probability between patients who were treated without RT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.8% and 26.5%, respectively) and those treated with EBRT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.4% and 25.6%, respectively) or VBT (10-year rate, 14.9%). In the individual trials, no significant differences were found between treatment arms. All cancer survivors had a higher risk of developing a second cancer compared with an age- and sex-matched general population. The standardized incidence ratio for any second cancer was 2.98 (95% CI, 2.82 to 3.14). CONCLUSION: In this pooled trial cohort of > 2,500 patients with pelvic cancers, those who underwent EBRT or VBT had no higher probability of developing a second cancer than patients who were treated with surgery alone. However, patients with rectal or endometrial cancer had an increased probability of developing a second cancer compared with the general population.

Health-related quality of life 14 years after preoperative short-term radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative short-term radiotherapy (PRT) in combination with total mesorectal excision (TME) has shown to improve local control in rectal cancer treatment, however without a survival benefit and at the cost of increased morbidity. The current study investigates the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients 14 years after treatment in the Dutch TME trial. METHODS: In the TME trial (1996-1999) 1530 Dutch patients with rectal cancer were treated with TME and randomly assigned to PRT (5 × 5 Gy). In 2012 HRQL was evaluated in surviving patients (n=606) using a questionnaire combining EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-CR29 and additional questions. FINDINGS: Results were obtained from 478 patients (82%), with a median follow up of 14 years. PRT+TME patients without stoma reported more faecal leakage and higher stool frequency, resulting in increased need of pads. Furthermore, irradiated males reported more erection problems. However, radiotherapy did not have negative effects on overall functioning. Compared with Dutch population, patients in both treatment arms reported a small decrease in overall functioning and males reported less sexual activity, interest and enjoyment and more erection difficulties. Irradiated females reported more vaginal dryness and more pain at intercourse compared with Dutch population. INTERPRETATION: Long-term HRQL evaluation shows that treatment-related symptoms are still present 14 years after treatment for rectal cancer. Radiotherapy increased bowel dysfunction in patients without stoma. Compared with the Dutch population, both groups reported increased sexual dysfunction. Despite these treatment-related symptoms, there was no difference in overall functioning and global health between TME and PRT+TME.