Total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: Making sense of the results from the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials.

A few months ago, results from two randomised phase III trials of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in locally advanced rectal cancer were presented (RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23), consistently showing better short- and long-term outcomes with TNT as compared with standard neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT). These results represent corroborating evidence in support of a practice that many centres had already implemented based on promising preliminary data. Also, they provide new, high-level evidence to endorse TNT as a new management option in the treatment algorithm of stage II-III rectal cancer in those centres where CRT and SCRT have long remained the only accepted standard neoadjuvant treatments. Having two consistently positive trials is certainly reassuring regarding the potential of TNT as a general treatment approach. Nevertheless, substantial differences between these trials pose important challenges in relation to the generalisability and applicability of their results, and translation of the same into practical clinical recommendations. In this article, we address a number of key questions that the RAPIDO and PRODIGE 23 trials have raised among the broad community of gastrointestinal oncologists, proposing an interpretation of the data that may help the decision making, and highlighting grey areas that warrant further investigation.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer: Current evidence and recommendations for clinical practice.

While adjuvant chemotherapy is an established treatment for pathological stage II and especially stage III colon cancer, its role in the multimodal management of rectal cancer remains controversial. As a result, there is substantial variation in the use of this treatment in clinical practice. Even among centres and physicians who consider adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard treatment, notable heterogeneity exists with regard to patient selection criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The controversy around this topic is confirmed by the lack of full consensus among national and international clinical guidelines. While most of the clinical trials do not support the contention that adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival outcomes if pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy is also given, these suffer from many limitations that preclude drawing definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, in the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians should be guided by the available data and refrain from extrapolating results of adjuvant colon cancer trials to inform treatment decisions for rectal cancer. Patients should be informed of the evidence gap, be given the opportunity to carefully discuss pros and cons of all the possible management options and be empowered in the decision making. In this article we review the available evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer and propose a risk-adapted decisional algorithm that largely relies on informed patient preferences.

Grey areas and evidence gaps in the management of rectal cancer as revealed by comparing recommendations from clinical guidelines.

BACKGROUND: While the management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer has rapidly evolved over the last few decades, many grey areas and highly debated topics remain that foster significant variation in clinical practice. We aimed to identify controversial points and evidence gaps in this disease setting by systematically comparing recommendations from national and international clinical guidelines. METHODS: Twenty-six clinical questions reflecting practical challenges in the routine management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer patients were selected. Recommendations from the ESMO, NCCN, JSCCR, Australian and Ontario guidelines were extrapolated and compared using a 4-tier classification system (i.e., identical/very similar, similar, slightly different, different). Overall agreement between guidelines (i.e., substantial/complete disagreement, partial disagreement, partial agreement, substantial/complete agreement) was assessed for each clinical question and compared against the highest level of available evidence by using the χ2 statistic test. RESULTS: Guidelines were in substantial/complete agreement, partial agreement, partial disagreement, and substantial/complete disagreement for 8 (30.8%), 2 (7.7%), 7 (26.9%), and 9 (34.6%) clinical questions, respectively. High level of evidence supported clinical recommendations in 3/10 cases (30%) where guidelines were in agreement and in 10/16 cases (62.5%) where guidelines were in disagreement (χ2 = 2.6, p = 0.106). Agreement was frequently reached for questions regarding diagnosis, staging, and radiology/pathology pro-forma reporting, while disagreement characterised most of the treatment-related topics. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation exists across clinical guidelines in the recommendations for the management of nonmetastatic and oligometastatic rectal cancer. This variation is only partly explained by the lack of supporting, high-level evidence.

Axillary nodal involvement by primary tumor features in early breast cancer: an analysis of 2600 patients.

BACKGROUND: Primary tumor characteristics, which are readily available to all clinicians, may aid in selecting the optimal adjuvant therapy for patients with breast cancer (BC). Herein, we investigated the relationship between tumor size, hormone receptor and HER2 status, Ki67 and age with axillary lymph node metastases (ALNM) in early-BC patients. METHODS: We analyzed data on consecutive 2600 early-BC cases collected in the registry of Fondazione IRCC Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano, Italy. Correlation between Ki67 and primary tumor size (T-size) was calculated by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Association of ALNM with Ki67 and other tumor characteristics was investigated by logistic regression. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated in all cases, and separately analyzed according to age, T-size and BC subtype. RESULTS: Large tumor size strongly associated to ALNM, with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for each 5-mm increase of 1.32 (95% CI 1.24-1.41), except for triple-negative BC (TNBC) cases. In tumors =10 mm, without lymphovascular invasion, representing the strongest predictor of ALNM (OR 6.09, 95% CI 4.93-7.53), Ki67 resulted particularly informative, with a fourfold increased odds of ALNM for values > 30%. CONCLUSIONS: These results raise the question whether axillary node status is redundant in cases with exceptionally good features, i.e., small tumors with low Ki67, or in those candidate to adjuvant systemic treatment/radiotherapy anyway including TNBC, and support the incorporation of primary BC tumor characteristics as stratification factors in ongoing trials aiming at de-escalating axillary surgical procedures.

The use of breast imaging for predicting response to neoadjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab and their combination in HER2-positive breast cancer: Results from Neo-ALTTO.

AIM: To determine the value of mammography and breast ultrasound (US) in predicting outcomes in HER2 positive breast cancer patients (pts) within Neo-ALTTO trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Mammography and US were required at baseline, week 6 and surgery. Two independent blinded investigators reviewed the measurements and assigned the corresponding response category. Pts showing complete or partial response according to RECIST (v1.1) were classified as responders. The association between imaging response at week 6 or prior to surgery was evaluated with respect to pathological complete response (pCR) and event-free Survival (EFS). RESULTS: Of the 455 pts enrolled in the trial, 267 (61%) and 340 (77%) had evaluable mammography and US at week 6; 248 (56%) and 309 (70%) pts had evaluable mammography and US prior to surgery. At week 6, 32% and 43% of pts were classified as responders by mammography and US, respectively. pCR rates were twice as high for responders than non-responders (week 6: 46% versus 23% by US, p < 0.0001; 41% versus 24% by mammography, p = 0.007). Positive and negative predictive values of mammography and US prior to surgery were 37% and 35%, and 82% and 70%, respectively. No significant correlation was found between response by mammography and/or US at week 6/surgery and EFS. CONCLUSIONS: Mammography and US were underused in Neo-ALTTO although US had the potential to assess early response whereas mammography to detect residual disease prior to surgery. Our data still emphasise the need for further imaging studies on pts treated with neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy.

Disease progression pattern in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with anti-HER2 therapies.

PURPOSE: Over the last decade a dramatic improvement in the treatment and prognosis of human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has been achieved. This study aimed to describe pattern, timing of metastases, and time to progression (TTP) of MBC patients (pts) treated with multiple lines of therapy with trastuzumab and/or lapatinib. METHODS: Clinical-pathologic features, treatment-lines and metastatic sites were collected from the institutional database; TTP was evaluated for each treatment-line. A meta-analysis of treatment-line estimates was performed; Q test and I (2)-index were used to detect and estimate heterogeneity. Cox's proportional hazards model and Fine and Gray's proportional subhazards model in a competing risks setting were used to detect differences in hazard rate and to estimate relative risks. RESULTS: 112 pts were analyzed. The median number of treatment-lines administered was 6 (range 1-17) and 524 (86 %) disease progression events were observed (median follow up 4.2 years). Distribution of metastases at baseline remained consistent across all lines. Having a given site affected by metastasis was a major risk factor of progression in that site. Hormone-receptor-positive pts resulted more likely to progress on bone (HR = 1.88). Elderly pts were less likely to progress on CNS (HR = 0.73). Median TTP resulted superior to 5 months up to the 6th line of treatment, reaching a plateau at the 9th treatment-line. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that risk factors for progression in HER2 positive MBC do not significantly differ between various distributions of metastases, and that MBC pts benefit from anti-HER2 therapy even in late treatment-lines.