Salvage surgery for local failures after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for early stage non-small cell lung cancer

__Introduction:__ The literature on surgical salvage, i.e. lung resections in patients who develop a local recurrence following stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), is limited. We describe our experience with salvage surgery in nine patients who developed a local recurrence following SABR for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). __Methods:__ Patients who underwent surgical salvage for a local recurrence following SABR for NSCLC were identified from two Dutch institutional databases. Complications were scored using the Dindo-Clavien-classification. __Results:__ Nine patients who underwent surgery for a local recurrence were identified. Median time to local recurrence was 22 months. Recurrences were diagnosed with CT- and/or 18FDG-PET-imaging, with four patients also having a pre-surgical pathological diagnosis. Extensive adhesions were observed during two resections, requiring conversion from a thoracoscopic procedure to thoracotomy during one of these procedures. Three patients experienced complications post-surgery; grade 2 (N = 2) and grade 3a (N = 1), respectively. All resection specimens showed viable tumor cells. Median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range 5-15 days) and 30-day mortality was 0 %. Lymph node dissection revealed mediastinal metastases in 3 patients, all of whom received adjuvant therapy. __Conclusions:__ Our experience with nine surgical procedures for local recurrences post-SABR revealed two grade IIIa complications, and a 30-day mortality of 0 %, suggesting that salvage surgery can be safely performed after SABR

Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy combined with intradermal heat-killed mycobacterium obuense (IMM-101) vaccination for non-progressive locally advanced pancreatic cancer, after induction chemotherapy with (modified)FOLFIRINOX: the LAPC-2 trial

Background and purpose: In this phase I/II trial, non-progressive locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients after (modified)FOLFIRINOX therapy were treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) combined with heat-killed mycobacterium (IMM-101) vaccinations. We aimed to assess safety, feasibility, and efficacy of this treatment approach.Materials and methods: On five consecutive days, patients received a total of 40 Gray (Gy) of SBRT with a dose of 8 Gy per fraction. Starting two weeks prior to SBRT, they in addition received six bi-weekly intradermal vaccinations with one milligram of IMM-101. The primary outcomes were the number of grade 4 or higher adverse events and the one-year progression free-survival (PFS) rate. Results: Thirty-eight patients were included and started study treatment. Median follow-up was 28.4 months (95 %CI 24.3 - 32.6). We observed one grade 5, no grade 4 and thirteen grade 3 adverse events, none related to IMM-101. The one-year PFS rate was 47 %, the median PFS was 11.7 months (95 %CI 11.0 - 12.5) and the median overall survival was 19.0 months (95 %CI 16.2 - 21.9). Eight (21 %) tumors were resected, of which 6 (75 %) were R0 resections. Outcomes were comparable with the outcomes of the patients from the previous LAPC-1 trial, in which LAPC patients were treated with SBRT, without IMM-101.Conclusion: Combination treatment with IMM-101 and SBRT was safe and feasible for non-progressive locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients after (modified)FOLFIRINOX. No improvement in the progression-free survival could be demonstrated by adding IMM-101 to SBRT.(c) 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V. Radiotherapy and Oncology 183 (2023) 109541Surgical oncolog

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus active surveillance for oesophageal cancer: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery is a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. With this treatment, 29% of patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen. This provides the rationale for investigating an active surveillance approach. The aim of this study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of active surveillance vs. standard oesophagectomy after nCRT for oesophageal cancer. Methods: This is a phase-III multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. A total of 300 patients with clinically complete response (cCR, i.e. no local or disseminated disease proven by histology) after nCRT will be randomised to show non-inferiority of active surveillance to standard oesophagectomy (non-inferiority margin 15%, intra-correlation coefficient 0.02, power 80%, 2-sided α 0.05, 12% drop-out). Patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-I) 4-6 weeks after nCRT, consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies of the primary tumour site and other suspected lesions. Clinically complete responders will undergo a second CRE (CRE-II), 6-8 weeks after CRE-I. CRE-II will include 18F-FDG-PET-CT, followed by endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and ultra-endosonography plus fine needle aspiration of suspected lymph nodes and/or PET- positive lesions. Patients with cCR at CRE-II will be assigned to oesophagectomy (first phase) or active surveillance (second phase of the study). The duration of the first phase is determined randomly over the 12 centres, i.e., stepped-wedge cluster design. Patients in the active surveillance arm will undergo diagnostic evaluations similar to CRE-II at 6/9/12/16/20/24/30/36/48 and 60 months after nCRT. In this arm, oesophagectomy will be offered only to patients in whom locoregional regrowth is highly suspected or proven, without distant dissemination. The main study parameter is overall survival; secondary endpoints include percentage of patients who do not undergo surgery, quality of life, clinical irresectability (cT4b) rate, radical resection rate, postoperative complications, progression-free survival, distant dissemination rate, and cost-effectiveness. We hypothesise that active surveillance leads to non-inferior survival, improved quality of life and a reduction in costs, compared to standard oesophagectomy. Discussion: If active surveillance and surgery as needed after nCRT leads to non-inferior survival compared to standard oesophagectomy, this organ-sparing approach can be implemented as a standard of care

The "liver-first approach" for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the outcome of "the liver-first" approach in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases were primarily treated for their liver metastases. If successful, patients underwent treatment for the rectal tumor. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were included. One patient had liver resection without neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy. All remaining 22 patients underwent laparotomy after chemotherapy. Eighteen patients underwent partial liver resection and subsequent chemoradiotherapy for the rectal cancer. One patient underwent in one session a partial liver resection and a low anterior resection. Six patients were not treated according to protocol because of extensive disease. Sixteen patients (73 percent) completed the full treatment protocol and all are alive after a median period of 19 (range, 7-56) months. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first sizable report on the "liver-first approach" demonstrating that it may be considered the preferred treatment schedule for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. It allows most patients to undergo curative resections of both metastatic and primary disease and can avoid useless rectal surgery in patients with incurable metastatic disease

The Importance of a Minimal Tumor-Free Resection Margin in Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The importance of the circumferential resection margin has been demonstrated in primary rectal cancer, but the role of the minimal tumor-free resection margin in locally recurrent rectal cancer is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the prognostic importance of a minimal tumor-free resection margin in locally recurrent rectal cancer. DESIGN: This was a single-institution, retrospective study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS: Based on the final pathology report, surgically treated patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer between 1990 and 2013 were divided into 4 groups: 1) tumor-free margins of >2 mm, 2) tumor-free margins of >0 to 2 mm, 3) microscopically involved margins, and 4) macroscopically involved margins. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local control and overall survival were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 174 patients with a median follow-up of 27 months (range, 0-144 months) were eligible for analysis. There was a significant difference in 5-year local re-recurrence-free survival in favor of 41 patients with tumor-free margins of >2 mm compared with 34 patients with tumor-free margins of >0 to 2 mm (80% vs 62%; p = 0.03) and a significant difference in 5-year overall survival (60% vs 37%; p = 0.01). The 5-year local re-recurrence-free and overall survival rates for 55 patients with microscopically involved margins were 28% and 16%, and for 20 patients with macroscopically involved margins the rates were 0% and 5%. On multivariable analysis, tumor-free margins of >0 to 2 mm were independently associated with higher re-recurrence rates (HR, 2.76 (95% CI, 1.06-7.16)) and poorer overall survival (HR, 2.57 (95% CI, 1.27-5.21)) compared with tumor-free margins of >2 mm. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Resection margin status is an independent prognostic factor for re-recurrence rate and overall survival in surgically treated, locally recurrent rectal cancer. In complete resections, patients with tumor-free resection margins of >0 to 2 mm have a higher re-recurrence rate and a poorer overall survival than patients with tumor-free resection margins of >2 mm

Intraoperative radiation therapy reduces local recurrence rates in patients with microscopically involved circumferential resection margins after resection of locally advanced rectal cancer

Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is advocated by some for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who have involved or narrow circumferential resection margins (CRM) after rectal surgery. This study evaluates the potentially beneficial effect of IORT on local control. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All surgically treated patients with LARC treated in a tertiary referral center between 1996 and 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. The outcome in patients treated with IORT with a clear but narrow CRM (</=2 mm) or a microscopically involved CRM was compared with the outcome in patients who were not treated with IORT. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients underwent resection of LARC, and 95 patients (23%) had a CRM </= 2 mm. Four patients were excluded from further analysis because of a macroscopically involved resection margin. In 43 patients with clear but narrow CRMs, there was no difference in the cumulative 5-year local recurrence-free survival of patients treated with (n=21) or without (n=22) IORT (70% vs 79%, P=.63). In 48 patients with a microscopically involved CRM, there was a significant difference in the cumulative 5-year local recurrence-free survival in favor of the patients treated with IORT (n=31) compared with patients treated without IORT (n=17) (84 vs 41%, P=.01). Multivariable analysis confirmed that IORT was independently associated with a decreased local recurrence rate (hazard ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.86). There was no significant difference in complication rate of patients treated with or without IORT (65% vs 52%, P=.18) CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that IORT reduces local recurrence rates in patients with LARC with a microscopically involved CRM

Outcome in patients with resectable locally recurrent rectal cancer after total mesorectal excision with and without previous neoadjuvant radiotherapy for the primary rectal tumor

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The widespread use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRTx) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) introduced the problem of treating locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after nRTx and TME. Few data exist on the outcome of the surgical treatment of this type of LRRC and the influence of nRTx for the primary tumor on the outcome is unclear. METHODS: All patients receiving multimodality treatment (including intraoperative radiotherapy) for LRRC in our center between 1996 and 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. The outcome of patients with nonmetastasized resectable LRRC who received nRTx and TME for the primary tumor was compared to the outcome of patients who did not receive nRTx for the primary tumor. RESULTS: During this period, 139 patients underwent surgery for LRRC; 93 of these patients underwent curative surgery for LRRC after TME for the primary tumor. Sixty-five patients did not receive nRTx for the primary tumor, whereas 28 patients received nRTx for the primary tumor. There were no significant differences in the number of incomplete resections or perioperative morbidities. There was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (28 vs. 43%, p = 0.81), recurrence-free survival (55 vs. 48%, p = 0.5), and disease-free survival (27 vs. 40%, p = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of carefully selected patients with nonmetastasized resectable LRRC after nRTx and TME for the primary tumor is feasible and can result in sustained local control and overall survival. Patients with resectable LRRC who received nRTx for the primary tumor do not have a poorer outcome than patients who did not