INTRODUCTION: Although diabetic patients with rectal cancer have poorer outcomes than their nondiabetic counterparts, few studies have looked at diabetics' response to therapy as an explanation for this disparity. This study compares the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) response in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with locally advanced rectal cancers. METHODS: This is a single-institution, retrospective review of rectal cancer patients who received CRT followed by resection from 1995 to 2006. Pretreatment tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging was determined using endorectal ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) scan, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); post-treatment staging was determined by pathological review. RESULTS: 110 patients were included; seventeen had diabetes and 93 were nondiabetics. Pretreatment staging was similar in both groups. Sixteen of the diabetics (94%) completed CRT compared to 92% (86/93) of the nondiabetics. Tumor downstaging rates were similar in the two groups (53% in diabetics, 52% in nondiabetics). Nondiabetic patients had a higher rate of nodal downstaging although not statistically significant (67% versus 27%, P = 0.80). While none of the diabetics patients achieved a pathologic complete response (pCR), 23% (21/93) of the nondiabetics did (P = 0.039). Local progression rates were higher in the diabetic group (24% versus 5%, P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is less effective in diabetic patients than in nondiabetics. While minimal differences are found in the rate of downstaging, the rate of achieving a complete pathologic response was significantly higher in nondiabetic patients, and in fact was not seen in any of our diabetic patients. This may explain the poorer outcomes seen in diabetic patients with rectal cancer.
INTRODUCTION: Although diabeticpatients with rectal cancer have poorer outcomes than their nondiabetic counterparts, few studies have looked at diabetics' response to therapy as an explanation for this disparity. This study compares the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) response in diabetic and nondiabeticpatients with locally advanced rectal cancers. METHODS: This is a single-institution, retrospective review of rectal cancerpatients who received CRT followed by resection from 1995 to 2006. Pretreatment tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging was determined using endorectal ultrasound, computed tomography (CT) scan, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); post-treatment staging was determined by pathological review. RESULTS: 110 patients were included; seventeen had diabetes and 93 were nondiabetics. Pretreatment staging was similar in both groups. Sixteen of the diabetics (94%) completed CRT compared to 92% (86/93) of the nondiabetics. Tumor downstaging rates were similar in the two groups (53% in diabetics, 52% in nondiabetics). Nondiabeticpatients had a higher rate of nodal downstaging although not statistically significant (67% versus 27%, P = 0.80). While none of the diabeticspatients achieved a pathologic complete response (pCR), 23% (21/93) of the nondiabetics did (P = 0.039). Local progression rates were higher in the diabetic group (24% versus 5%, P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is less effective in diabeticpatients than in nondiabetics. While minimal differences are found in the rate of downstaging, the rate of achieving a complete pathologic response was significantly higher in nondiabeticpatients, and in fact was not seen in any of our diabeticpatients. This may explain the poorer outcomes seen in diabeticpatients with rectal cancer.
Authors: Brandon J Anderson; Amy E Wahlquist; Elizabeth G Hill; David T Marshall; Eric T Kimchi; Kevin F Staveley O'Carroll; E Ramsay Camp Journal: Int J Surg Date: 2016-07-16 Impact factor: 6.071
Authors: J McKee Alderman; Kevin Flurkey; Natasha L Brooks; Sneha B Naik; Jonathan M Gutierrez; Urmila Srinivas; Kristen B Ziara; Linhong Jing; Gunnar Boysen; Rod Bronson; Simon Klebanov; Xian Chen; James A Swenberg; Mats Stridsberg; Carol E Parker; David E Harrison; Terry P Combs Journal: Exp Gerontol Date: 2008-06-07 Impact factor: 4.032
Authors: M Agostina Santoro; R Eric Blue; Sarah F Andres; Amanda T Mah; Laurianne Van Landeghem; P Kay Lund Journal: Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 4.052
Authors: Katherine T Mills; Charles F Bellows; Aaron E Hoffman; Tanika N Kelly; Giuseppe Gagliardi Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Kelly B Stein; Claire F Snyder; Bethany B Barone; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Kimberly S Peairs; Rachel L Derr; Antonio C Wolff; Frederick L Brancati Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 3.199