Impact of radiotherapy on anorectal function in patients with rectal cancer following a watch and wait programme

Background and purpose: To assess the long-term anorectal function in rectal cancer patients following a watch-and-wait policy after chemoradiotherapy and to investigate the dose-volume effects of radiotherapy on the anorectal function. Methods and materials: Thirty-three patients with primary rectal cancer who were treated with chemoradiotherapy and a watch-and-wait policy with minimum follow-up of 2 years were included. We assessed the anorectal function using anorectal manometry and patient reported outcomes (Vaizey and LARS score). Dose-volume histograms were calculated for the rectum and anal sphincter complex, and associations between the dose-volume parameters and anorectal function were assessed. Results: Dmean to the rectum and anal sphincter complex was 50.5 Gy and 44.7 Gy, respectively. After a median follow-up of 38 (range 23-116) months, 33.3% of the patients reported major LARS. Mean LARS score was 23.4 +/- 11.3 and mean Vaizey score was 4.3 +/- 4.1. The most frequent complaints were clustering of defaecation and faecal urgency. Trends towards a higher Vaizey and LARS score after higher anal sphincter complex dose were observed, although these associations were not statistically significant. Conclusions: This is the first study to investigate the late dose-volume effects of radiotherapy specifically on the anorectal function in rectal cancer patients. One-third of the patients had major LARS and the most frequent reported complaints were clustering and faecal urgency. Additionally, we observed trends towards worse long-term anorectal function after higher anal sphincter complex radiotherapy dose. However, this should be evaluated on a larger scale. Future efforts to minimise the dose to the sphincters could possibly reduce the impact of radiotherapy on the anorectal function. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Oncological Outcomes and Hospital Costs of the Treatment in Patients With Rectal Cancer:Watch-and-Wait Policy and Standard Surgical Treatment

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the costs of the current treatment strategy in locally advanced rectal cancer, in which patients with a clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy are treated in a watch-and-wait policy.OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to present the oncological outcome and hospital costs of patients with a complete response after chemoradiotherapy (watch-and-wait policy) and patients with an incomplete response after chemoradiotherapy (total mesorectal excision).DESIGN: This was a cohort study.SETTINGS: This study was conducted at an academic and a nonacademic hospital.PATIENTS: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer received either a watch-and-wait policy or total mesorectal excision depending on their clinical response to chemoradiotherapy.INTERVENTIONS: Watch-and-wait policy and total mesorectal excision were the treatments applied.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were overall, local recurrence-free, and distant metastasis-free survival and hospital costs over a 2-year follow-up period.RESULTS: A total of 292 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were included. Mean age was 65.1 years, and 64.7% were men. One hundred five patients were included in the watch-and-wait subgroup, and 187 patients were in the total mesorectal excision subgroup. Both subgroups showed good oncological outcomes. Hospital costs consisted of 5 categories: costs of primary surgery, costs of adjuvant chemotherapy, costs of examinations, costs of additional surgery, and costs of treatment of regrowth/metastasis. The mean costs per patient were euro6713 (watch-and-wait subgroup) and euro17,108 (total mesorectal excision subgroup) over the first 2 years.LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the following: costs were only from a hospital perspective, follow-up was 2 years, the study was retrospective in part, and there was no comparative study.CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival was good in both subgroups and comparable to literature. The mean costs per patient differ between the watch-and-wait subgroup (euro6713) and the total mesorectal excision subgroup (euro17,108). No comparison between the groups could be made. Based on the results of this study, the current strategy, where patients with a clinical complete response are treated in a watch-and-wait policy, and patients with an incomplete response are treated with total mesorectal excision, is likely to be (cost)saving. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B177..</p

Development of a consensus-based delineation guideline for locally recurrent rectal cancer

Background and purpose: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is used in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) to increase chances of a radical surgical resection. Delineation in LRRC is hampered by complex disease presentation and limited clinical exposure. Within the PelvEx II trial, evaluating the benefit of chemotherapy preceding nCRT for LRRC, a delineation guideline was developed by an expert LRRC team. Materials and methods: Eight radiation oncologists, from Dutch and Swedish expert centres, participated in two meetings, delineating GTV and CTV in six cases. Regions at-risk for re-recurrence or irradical resection were identified by eleven expert surgeons and one expert radiologist. Target volumes were evaluated multidisciplinary. Inter-observer variation was analysed. Results: Inter-observer variation in delineation of LRRC appeared large. Multidisciplinary evaluation per case is beneficial in determining target volumes. The following consensus regarding target volumes was reached. GTV should encompass all tumour, including extension into OAR if applicable. If the tumour is in fibrosis, GTV should encompass the entire fibrotic area. Only if tumour can clearly be distinguished from fibrosis, GTV may be reduced, as long as the entire fibrotic area is covered by the CTV. CTV is GTV with a 1 cm margin and should encompass all at-risk regions for irradical resection or re-recurrence. CTV should not be adjusted towards other organs. Multifocal recurrences should be encompassed in one CTV. Elective nodal delineation is only advised in radiotherapy-naïve patients. Conclusion: This study provides a first consensus-based delineation guideline for LRRC. Analyses of re-recurrences is needed to understand disease behaviour and to optimize delineation guidelines accordingly

Development of a consensus-based delineation guideline for locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is used in locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) to increase chances of a radical surgical resection. Delineation in LRRC is hampered by complex disease presentation and limited clinical exposure. Within the PelvEx II trial, evaluating the benefit of chemotherapy preceding nCRT for LRRC, a delineation guideline was developed by an expert LRRC team. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight radiation oncologists, from Dutch and Swedish expert centres, participated in two meetings, delineating GTV and CTV in six cases. Regions at-risk for re-recurrence or irradical resection were identified by eleven expert surgeons and one expert radiologist. Target volumes were evaluated multidisciplinary. Inter-observer variation was analysed. RESULTS: Inter-observer variation in delineation of LRRC appeared large. Multidisciplinary evaluation per case is beneficial in determining target volumes. The following consensus regarding target volumes was reached. GTV should encompass all tumour, including extension into OAR if applicable. If the tumour is in fibrosis, GTV should encompass the entire fibrotic area. Only if tumour can clearly be distinguished from fibrosis, GTV may be reduced, as long as the entire fibrotic area is covered by the CTV. CTV is GTV with a 1 cm margin and should encompass all at-risk regions for irradical resection or re-recurrence. CTV should not be adjusted towards other organs. Multifocal recurrences should be encompassed in one CTV. Elective nodal delineation is only advised in radiotherapy-naïve patients. CONCLUSION: This study provides a first consensus-based delineation guideline for LRRC. Analyses of re-recurrences is needed to understand disease behaviour and to optimize delineation guidelines accordingly