The Rise of Patients Declining Rectal Cancer Surgery in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for rectal cancer is rapidly evolving, particularly with the increasing use of neoadjuvant therapies. Still, up to 50% of patients with stage II-III disease require surgical resection post-neoadjuvant therapy to achieve the best oncologic outcomes. Many patients, however, hope to avoid surgery. This study aimed to assess trends and factors associated with declining recommended oncologic resection after systemic therapy nationally and in our institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database from 2009 to 2021 and an institutional cohort at an academic center between 2009 and 2022 including adults with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and were suitable for surgery. RESULTS: Of 96,997 patients nationally, the rate of declining surgery increased from 2.3% in 2009 to 6.3% in 2021, a trend mirrored in our institutional cohort of 365 patients (0% in 2009/2010 to approximately 6-12% in 2021/2022). Locally, patients who declined surgery had higher rates of tobacco use, temporary loss to follow-up during therapy, and a more robust, albeit incomplete, tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy compared with controls who underwent surgery. Despite a stoma being the most cited reason for declining surgery, 30.4% of patients who declined oncologic resection died with a stoma. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore a notable trend of patients declining oncologic resections following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. By shedding light on the outcomes of patients who opt against surgery, we address a critical gap in the literature essential for informing patients about potential risks.

Alliance A022104/NRG-GI010: The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial: a randomized phase II/III trial testing the efficacy of triplet versus doublet chemotherapy regarding clinical complete response and disease-free survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients with clinical complete response (cCR) after TNT may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated cCR as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and patient groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation, improve quality of life for patients and improve survival outcomes. METHODS: In this NCI-sponsored multi-group randomized, seamless phase II/III trial (1:1), up to 760 patients with LARC, T4N0, any T with node positive disease (any T, N +) or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N + vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Patients will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 3-4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Patients will undergo assessment 8-12 (± 4) weeks post-TNT completion. The primary endpoint for the phase II portion will compare cCR between treatment arms. A total number of 312 evaluable patients (156 per arm) will provide statistical power of 90.5% to detect a 17% increase in cCR rate, at a one-sided alpha = 0.048. The primary endpoint for the phase III portion will compare disease-free survival (DFS) between treatment arms. A total of 285 DFS events will provide 85% power to detect an effect size of hazard ratio 0.70 at a one-sided alpha of 0.025, requiring enrollment of 760 patients (380 per arm). Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse event rates. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, plasma and buffy coat, and serial rectal MRIs will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and had accrued 330 patients as of May 2024. Study support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . DISCUSSION: Building on data from modern day rectal cancer trials and patient input from national advocacy groups, we have designed The Janus Rectal Cancer Trial studying chemotherapy intensification via a consolidation chemotherapy approach with the intent to enhance cCR and DFS rates, increase organ preservation rates, and improve quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163; Support includes U10CA180868 (NRG) and U10CA180888 (SWOG).

Outcomes of rectal cancer patients who refuse surgery after incomplete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the standard of care for patients with rectal cancer who have an incomplete response to total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). A minority of patients will refuse curative intent resection. The aim of this study is to examine the outcomes for these patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of stage 1-3 rectal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy or TNT at a single institution. Patients either underwent TME, watch-and-wait protocol, or if they refused TME, were counseled and watched (RCW). Clinical outcomes and resource utilization were examined in each group. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-one patients (Male 59%) were included with a median surveillance of 43 months. Twenty-nine patients (17%) refused TME and had shortened overall survival (OS). Twelve patients who refused TME converted to a complete clinical response (cCR) on subsequent staging with a prolonged OS. 92% of these patients had a near cCR at initial staging endoscopy. Increased physician visits and testing was utilized in RCW and WW groups. CONCLUSION: A significant portion of patients convert to cCR and have prolonged OS. Lengthening the time to declare cCR may be considered in select patients, such as those with a near cCR at initial endoscopic staging.

Treatment Options for Distal Rectal Cancer in the Era of Organ Preservation.

OPINION STATEMENT: The introduction of total mesorectal excision into the radical surgery of rectal cancer has significantly improved the oncological outcome with longer survival and lower local recurrence. Traditional treatment modalities of distal rectal cancer, relying on radical surgery, while effective, take their own set of risks, including surgical complications, potential damage to the anus, and surrounding structure owing to the pursuit of thorough resection. The progress of operating methods as well as the integration of systemic therapies and radiotherapy into the peri-operative period, particularly the exciting clinical complete response of patients after neoadjuvant treatment, have paved the way for organ preservation strategy. The non-inferiority oncological outcome of "watch and wait" compared with radical surgery underscores the potential of organ preservation not only to control local recurrence but also to reduce the need for treatments followed by structure destruction, hopefully improving the long-term quality of life. Radical radiotherapy provides another treatment option for patients unwilling or unable to undergo surgery. Organ preservation points out the direction of treatment for distal rectal cancer, while additional researches are needed to answer remaining questions about its optimal use.

Protocol for a national audit of the watch-and-wait approach in patients with rectal cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand: The ACCORD study.

AIM: The watch-and-wait approach is increasingly being used in the management of rectal cancer as many patients achieve a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant treatment This national, multicentre, retrospective cohort study aims to understand the use of the watch-and-wait approach in the management of rectal cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand and its associated outcomes. METHOD: This retrospective cohort study will include patients aged 18 years and over with biopsy proven rectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed between January 2015 and December 2022 who have a clinical complete response following neoadjuvant treatment (including short-course radiotherapy, long-course chemoradiotherapy or total neoadjuvant treatment) and have been managed with a watch-and-wait approach. Data will be collected from centres that manage rectal cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand with the eligible population being identified using data linkage with the National Cancer Registry. CONCLUSION: This multicentre, national cohort study will investigate the use of the watch-and-wait strategy for rectal cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand. Through novel data linkage approaches, these data and methods will lay the foundation for a future prospective registry and outcome-tracking initiative.

The conundrum of total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer.

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has fast become the paradigm in the management of rectal cancer. The widespread adoption of this approach across the world, not only for locally advanced cancers but even for cancers that otherwise would not merit chemotherapy, leads both to an increase in treatment-related toxicity for patients and burdens the healthcare services of the country. It is important to tailor treatment to each patient based not only on the tumour but, even more importantly, on the patient's expectations and goals. The intent of treatment while prescribing TNT needs to be clear, understanding that not all patients are suitable for an organ preservation (watch and wait) approach and that the survival benefits of TNT are not as obvious as most proponents believe.

Rectal cancer - avoiding surgery?

Nonoperative treatment of rectal cancer is gaining popularity. Several trials recently demonstrated advantages in disease-free survival with total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) with the addition of the watch and wait (WW) strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer. On longer follow-up, an unexpected increased risk in local recurrence in the TNT group at the RAPIDO trial suggested early surgery for nonresponding tumours. The WW option is globally accepted for a complete clinical response; however, a high rate of regrowth was found in a registry with an increased risk of distant metastases, questioning the deleterious effect of deferral of surgery in this group. The short- and long-term toxic effects of neoadjuvant treatment are costs to consider in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines compared with the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines, which favour surgery alone if good mesorectal resection is assured with increasing surgical proficiency adjusted to the precise anatomical location.

The time course of spontaneous closure of idiopathic full-thickness macular holes.

PURPOSE: Spontaneous closure of idiopathic full-thickness macular holes (iFTMH) has been reported regularly. However, little is known about its probability and timeline. METHODS: In this retrospective study all consecutive patients who presented between August 2008 and August 2019 were screened for the presence of a macular hole and only iFTMHs were included. The primary outcome measure was the spontaneous closure of the iFTMH. RESULTS: Of 1256 eyes with macular holes, 338 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Spontaneous closure of the iFTMH was detected in 31 eyes (9.2%) with a median time of 44 days after diagnosis. Eyes exhibiting spontaneous closure demonstrated a higher baseline best-corrected visual-acuity (BCVA) and smaller iFTMH diameter (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). The mean BCVA improved from 0.4 logMAR (SD ± 0.21) to 0.29 logMAR (SD ± 0.20) after spontaneous closure (p = 0.031). The iFTMH diameter was positively correlated with the time to spontaneous closure (Pearson-r = 0.37, p = 0.0377). Spontaneously closed iFTMHs reopened in 16% (n = 5) of cases, with a median of 136 days after closure. A logistic regression model showed the hole diameter was associated with spontaneous closure (odds-Ratio 0.97, 95%CI [0.96, 0.98]). The Kaplan-Meier-Curve revealed that approximately 25% of small-iFTMH (n = 124) and 55% of iFTMH with a diameter < 150µm (n = 48) closed spontaneously within two months. CONCLUSION: The established gold-standard for the treatment of iFTMHs is macular surgery. However, the potential for spontaneous closure of small iFTMHs must be acknowledged. Therefore, if surgical treatment is delayed in individual cases, close observation is recommended.

Surveillance after Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: What to do for Near-Complete Responders.

A proportion of patients who undergo total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer will achieve what is classified as a near-complete response. Significant debate exists as to the optimal management strategy for these patients with large heterogeneity in management. This article will examine the therapeutic and surveillance options for these patients as well as the relevant outcomes data.

Chemoradiation, Consolidation Chemotherapy, and Watch and Wait for Early Rectal Cancer.

As watch and wait has become an attractive management alternative among patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation, the focus of organ preservation has now shifted toward the use of this approach in patients with early rectal cancer. These patients would otherwise be treated without the use of neoadjuvant therapy for oncological reasons. The sole purpose of any neoadjuvant treatment here would be the achievement of a complete clinical response in an attempt to avoid total mesorectal excision. This has become particularly interesting after the incorporation of total neoadjuvant therapy regimens. These regimens have resulted in significantly higher rates of complete tumor regression and therefore become an interesting alternative among early rectal cancer patients where organ preservation is desired. The present review provides an overview of the currently available evidence and the preliminary experience with this rather controversial approach.

A multi-centre randomized controlled trial investigating Consolidation Chemotherapy with and without oxaliplatin in distal rectal cancer and Watch & Wait.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation(nCRT) has been considered the preferred initial treatment strategy for distal rectal cancer. Advantages of this approach include improved local control after radical surgery but also the opportunity for organ preserving strategies (Watch and Wait-WW). Consolidation chemotherapy(cCT) regimens using fluoropyrimidine-based with or without oxalipatin following nCRT have demonstrated to increase complete response and organ preservation rates among these patients. However, the benefit of adding oxaliplatin to cCT compared to fluoropirimidine alone regimens in terms of primary tumor response remains unclear. Since oxalipatin-treatment may be associated with considerable toxicity, it becomes imperative to understand the benefit of its incorporation into standard cCT regimens in terms of primary tumor response. The aim of the present trial is to compare the outcomes of 2 different cCT regimens following nCRT (fluoropyrimidine-alone versus fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin) for patients with distal rectal cancer. METHODS: In this multi-centre study, patients with magnetic resonance-defined distal rectal tumors will be randomized on a 1:1 ratio to receive long-course chemoradiation (54 Gy) followed by cCT with fluoropyrimidine alone versus fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin. Magnetic resonance(MR) will be analyzed centrally prior to patient inclusion and randomization. mrT2-3N0-1 tumor located no more than 1 cm above the anorectal ring determined by sagittal views on MR will be eligible for the study. Tumor response will be assessed after 12 weeks from radiotherapy(RT) completion. Patients with clinical complete response (clinical, endoscopic and radiological) may be enrolled in an organ-preservation program(WW). The primary endpoint of this trial is decision to organ-preservation surveillance (WW) at 18 weeks from RT completion. Secondary endpoints are 3-year surgery-free survival, TME-free survival, distant metastases-free survival, local regrowth-free survival and colostomy-free survival. DISCUSSION: Long-course nCRT with cCT is associated with improved complete response rates and may be a very attractive alternative to increase the chances for organ-preservation strategies. Fluoropyrimidine-based cCT with or without oxaliplatin has never been investigated in the setting of a randomized trial to compare clinical response rates and the possibility of organ-preservation. The outcomes of this study may significantly impact clinical practice of patients with distal rectal cancer interested in organ-preservation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT05000697; registered on August 11th, 2021.

MRI assessment of rectal cancer response to neoadjuvant therapy: a multireader study.

OBJECTIVES: A watch and wait strategy with the goal of organ preservation is an emerging treatment paradigm for rectal cancer following neoadjuvant treatment. However, the selection of appropriate patients remains a challenge. Most previous efforts to measure the accuracy of MRI in assessing rectal cancer response used a small number of radiologists and did not report variability among them. METHODS: Twelve radiologists from 8 institutions assessed baseline and restaging MRI scans of 39 patients. The participating radiologists were asked to assess MRI features and to categorize the overall response as complete or incomplete. The reference standard was pathological complete response or a sustained clinical response for > 2 years. RESULTS: We measured the accuracy and described the interobserver variability of interpretation of rectal cancer response between radiologists at different medical centers. Overall accuracy was 64%, with a sensitivity of 65% for detecting complete response and specificity of 63% for detecting residual tumor. Interpretation of the overall response was more accurate than the interpretation of any individual feature. Variability of interpretation was dependent on the patient and imaging feature investigated. In general, variability and accuracy were inversely correlated. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-based evaluation of response at restaging is insufficiently accurate and has substantial variability of interpretation. Although some patients' response to neoadjuvant treatment on MRI may be easily recognizable, as seen by high accuracy and low variability, that is not the case for most patients. KEY POINTS: • The overall accuracy of MRI-based response assessment is low and radiologists differed in their interpretation of key imaging features. • Some patients' scans were interpreted with high accuracy and low variability, suggesting that these patients' pattern of response is easier to interpret. • The most accurate assessments were those of the overall response, which took into consideration both T2W and DWI sequences and the assessment of both the primary tumor and the lymph nodes.

The ultimate local failure rate after the watch-and-wait strategy for rectal cancer: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesise that a high rate of tumour regrowth after the watch-and-wait (w&w) strategy may lead, despite salvage surgery, to a significant impairment of ultimate local control compared with immediate surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To test this hypothesis, we conducted meta-analyses of studies on the w&w strategy (both opportunistic and planned) with an ultimate local failure rate as an endpoint in three patient groups: (1) in all starting radio(chemo)therapy as potential w&w candidates, (2) in a subgroup starting w&w, and (3) in a subgroup with regrowth. RESULTS: We identified eight studies for evaluation of local failure in group 1 (N = 837) and 36 studies in group 2 (N = 1914) and in group 3 (N = 439). The meta-analysis revealed an ultimate local failure rate of 8.0% (95% CI 4.8%-12.1%) in group 1 and 5.4% (95% CI 3.9%-7.1) in group 2. These rates are similar to those reported in the literature following preoperative chemoradiation and surgery. However, in the most unfavourable group 3 (with regrowth), the rate of ultimate local failure was 24.1% (95% CI 17.9%-30.9%), with the most common causes being patients' refusal of salvage total mesorectal excision (TME) (9.1%), recurrence after salvage TME (7.8%), distant metastases (4.1%), frailty (2.4%), and pelvic tumour unresectability (1.7%). CONCLUSION: Nearly 25% of patients with regrowth (unfavourable subgroup) experienced ultimate local failure, primarily due to refusing salvage TME. The risk of ultimate local failure in patients initiating radio(chemo)therapy as potential w&w candidates, or in patients starting w&w, appears comparable to that reported after preoperative chemoradiation and surgery. However, this comparison may be biased, because w&w studies included more early tumours compared with surgical studies.

Light and shadow of watch-and-wait strategy in rectal cancer: oncological result, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy is a potential option for patients with rectal cancer who obtain a complete clinic response after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study is to analyze the long-term oncological outcomes and perform a cost-effectiveness analysis in patients undergoing this strategy for rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of patients treated with the WW strategy were prospectively collected from January 2015 to January 2020. A control group was created, matched 1:1 from a pool of 480 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision. An independent company carried out the financial analysis. Clinical and oncological outcomes were analyzed in both groups. Outcome parameters included surgical and follow-up costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost per QALY gained or the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: Forty patients were included in the WW group, with 40 patients in the surgical group. During a median follow-up period of 36 months, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar in the two groups. In the WW group, nine (22%) local regrowths were detected in the first 2 years. The permanent stoma rate was slightly higher after salvage surgery in the WW group compared to the surgical group (48.5% vs 20%, p < 0.01). The cost-effectiveness analysis was slightly better for the WW group, especially for low rectal cancer compared to medium-high rectal cancer (ICER = - 108,642.1 vs ICER = - 42,423). CONCLUSIONS: The WW strategy in locally advanced rectal cancer offers similar oncological outcomes with respect to the surgical group and excellent results in quality of life and cost outcomes, especially for low rectal cancer. Nonetheless, the complex surgical field during salvage surgery can lead to a high permanent stoma rate; therefore, the careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Oncologic outcomes of watch-and-wait strategy or surgery for low to intermediate rectal cancer in clinical complete remission after adjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A watch-and-wait (WW) strategy or surgery for low to intermediate rectal cancer that has reached clinical complete remission (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCRT) or total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has been widely used in the clinic, but both treatment strategies are controversial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the oncologic outcomes of a watch-and-wait strategy or a surgical approach to treat rectal cancer in complete remission and to report the evidence-based clinical advantages of the two treatment strategies. METHODS: Seven national and international databases were searched for clinical trials comparing the watch-and-wait strategy with surgical treatment for oncological outcomes in patients with rectal cancer in clinical complete remission. RESULTS: In terms of oncological outcomes, there was no significant difference between the watch-and-wait strategy and surgical treatment in terms of overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.92, 95% CI (0.52, 1.64), P = 0.777), and subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival (5-year DFS) between WW and both local excision (LE) and radical surgery (RS) (HR = 1.76, 95% CI (0.97, 3.19), P = 0.279; HR = 1.98, 95% CI (0.95, 4.13), P = 0.164), in distant metastasis rate (RR = 1.12, 95% CI (0.73, 1.72), P = 0.593), mortality rate (RR = 1.62, 95% CI (0.93, 2.84), P = 0.09), and organ preservation rate (RR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.94, 1.17), P = 0.394) which were not statistically significant and on the outcome indicators of local recurrence rate (RR = 2.09, 95% CI (1.44, 3.03), P < 0.001) and stoma rate (RR = 0.35, 95% CI (0.20, 0.61), P < 0.001). There were significant differences between the WW group and the surgical treatment group. CONCLUSION: There were no differences in OS, 5-year DFS, distant metastasis, and mortality between the WW strategy group and the surgical treatment group. The WW strategy did not increase the risk of local recurrence compared with local resection but may be at greater risk of local recurrence compared with radical surgery, and the WW group was significantly better than the surgical group in terms of stoma rate; the WW strategy was evidently superior in preserving organ integrity compared to radical excision. Consequently, for patients who exhibit a profound inclination towards organ preservation and the evasion of stoma formation in the scenario of clinically complete remission of rectal cancer, the WW strategy can be contemplated as a pragmatic alternative to surgical interventions. It is, however, paramount to emphasize that the deployment of such a strategy should be meticulously undertaken within the ambit of a multidisciplinary team's management and within specialized centers dedicated to rectal cancer management.

Patient and multidisciplinary team perspectives on watch and wait in rectal cancer.

This article adopts a multidisciplinary approach, including surgery, oncology, radiology and patient perspectives, to discuss the key points of debate surrounding a watch and wait approach. In an era of shared decision-making, discussion of watch and wait as an option in the context of complete clinical response is appropriate, although it is not the gold standard treatment. Key challenges are the difficulty in assessing for a complete clinical response, prediction of recurrence and access to timely diagnostics for surveillance. Salvage surgery has good results if regrowth is detected early but does have imperfect outcomes, with only a 90% salvage rate. Good communication with patients about the risks and alternatives is essential. Patients undergoing watch and wait should ideally be enrolled in prospective registries or clinical trials.

The neoadjuvant rectal score and a novel magnetic resonance imaging based neoadjuvant rectal score are stage independent predictors of long-term outcome in locally advanced rectal cancer.

AIM: Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score is an early surrogate for longer-term outcomes in rectal cancer undergoing radiotherapy and resection. In an era of increasing organ preservation, resection specimens are not always available to calculate the NAR score. Post-treatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) re-staging of regression is subjective, limiting reproducibility. We explored the potential for a novel MRI-based NAR score (mrNAR) adapted from the NAR formula. METHODS: Locally advanced rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy (nCRT) and surgery were retrospectively identified between 2008 and 2020 in a single cancer network. mrNAR was calculated by adapting the NAR formula, replacing pathological (p) stages with post-nCRT MR stages (ymr). Cox regression assessed relationships between clinicopathological characteristics, NAR and mrNAR with overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: In total, 381 NAR and 177 mrNAR scores were calculated. On univariate analysis NAR related to OS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-3.14, p = 0.001) and RFS (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.77-3.59, p = 0.001). NAR 3-year OS <8 was 95.3%, 8-16 was 88.6% and >16 was 80%. mrNAR related to OS (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.38-6.34, p = 0.005) and RFS (HR 2.99, 95% CI 1.49-6.00, p = 0.002). 3-year OS for mrNAR <8 was 96.2%, 8-16 was 92.4% and >16 was 78%. On multivariate analysis, mrNAR was a stage-independent predictor of OS and RFS. mrNAR corresponded to NAR score category in only 15% (positive predictive value 0.23) and 47.5% (positive predictive value 0.48) of cases for categories <8 and >16, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant rectal score is validated as a surrogate end-point for long-term outcomes. mrNAR categories do not correlate with NAR but have stage-independent prognostic value. mrNAR may represent a novel surrogate end-point for future neoadjuvant treatments that focus on organ preservation.

Non-interventional Management of Asymptomatic Diminutive Choledocholithiasis Versus Endoscopic Extraction in Consecutive Patients.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend treating choledocholithiasis, regardless of symptoms or stone size, with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, asymptomatic choledocholithiasis, discovered incidentally on imaging, may carry a higher risk of ERCP-related adverse events, and some asymptomatic and diminutive stones may not cause biliary adverse events during extended follow-up. Therefore, we aimed to clarify the best treatment strategies for asymptomatic choledocholithiasis based on stone size. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with incidental imaging-found asymptomatic diminutive (≤ 4 mm) or non-diminutive (> 4 mm) choledocholithiasis and divided them into two groups: those who did not undergo ERCP and were treated when complications arose (on-demand group) and those who underwent ERCP before being symptomatic (intervention group). Adverse events were defined as any biliary or pancreatic complication related to ERCP or arising during observation or after intervention. The primary outcome was the adjusted overall adverse event-free survival using the propensity score-based matching weights method comparing the two groups of stone size. RESULTS: Among 148 patients identified (median follow-up period, 969 days), 68 had diminutive stones and 80 had non-diminutive stones. Of the 68 patients with diminutive stones, 51 were in the on-demand group and 17 in the intervention group. The overall adjusted adverse event-free survival was significantly higher in the on-demand group for diminutive stones (97.4% and 70.1%, respectively, at 3 years; p = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Patients with incidental imaging-detected asymptomatic diminutive choledocholithiasis may benefit from clinical observation, pursuing ERCP when symptoms develop.

Local tumor regrowth after clinical complete response following neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: what happens when organ preservation falls short.

Organ preservation strategies, especially watch and wait, after neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer, have become topics that generate significant interest, for both patients and clinicians. The obvious advantage of these strategies is the avoidance of surgery with its associated risks and functional consequences. Over time, it has become evident that these strategies offer acceptable safety in oncological terms and, in most patients, allows preservation of the rectum without harming patients in terms of distant metastasis or survival. However, there is a small group of patients in whom the tumor returns after an initially diagnosed clinical complete response; patients with local tumor regrowth. The main threat in these patients is not simply local disease, which can be successfully managed in most cases, but the possible effects it may have on distant metastases. The pathophysiology of the phenomenon of local tumor regrowth is not well known and, therefore, strategies to minimize possible impact on survival are not well defined. Our aim is to review key issues in this subgroup that pose a substantial threat to the safety and viability of organ-preserving and watch-and-wait strategies. We also explore possible pathophysiologic explanations and future directions and perspectives that may improve both local and systemic disease control.

The 'inbetweeners': living on a watch and wait approach for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is an incurable disease; many people with the condition do not require active treatment and are monitored using a watch and wait approach. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of people living with a diagnosis of CLL and on watch and wait. METHODS: Using a descriptive qualitative approach, seven participants on the watch and wait approach were interviewed. Data analysis was guided by systematic text condensation. FINDINGS: Participants reported anxiety, referring to 'wait and worry'. Their information needs were not met, and they resorted to seeking information on possible future treatments themselves. They also experienced feeling like an imposter because they were not receiving active treatment like other patients with cancer. CONCLUSIONS: A greater understanding of how information provision affects levels of anxiety and worry among people living with CLL on watch and wait is needed. In addition, clinical nurse specialists could deliver education on the watch and wait approach, supplemented by video-based educational materials developed by the haematology team.