M Rupinski1, M Szczepkowski2, M Malinowska3, A Mroz1, L Pietrzak4, L Wyrwicz5, A Rutkowski5, K Bujko6. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Clinical Oncology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland; Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Warsaw, Poland. 2. Department of Rehabilitation, Jozef Piłsudski University of Physical Education, Poland; Clinical Department of General and Colorectal Surgery, Bielanski Hospital Warsaw, Poland. 3. Department of Pathology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Warsaw, Poland. 4. Department of Radiotherapy II, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Warsaw, Poland. 5. Department of Gastroenterological Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Warsaw, Poland. 6. Department of Radiotherapy II, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre, Warsaw, Poland. Electronic address: bujko@coi.waw.pl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During an ongoing phase II observational study on watch and wait policy in rectal cancer, a substantial number of patients presented residual lesion after radiotherapy with a clinical benign appearance. This article aims to discuss the clinical significance of such findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Main entry criteria were age ≥70 years and small tumour (≤5 cm and ≤60% of circumferential involvement) located in the low rectum. Patients received chemoradiation (50 Gy, 2 Gy per fraction concomitantly with a 5-Fu bolus and leucovorin) or 5 × 5 Gy if considered unfit for chemotherapy. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) were observed. Those with persistent tumours underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery [TEM] if the baseline tumour was ≤3 cm and cN0 or total mesorectal excision. RESULTS: The watch and wait procedure was used in 11 out of the total 35 patients (31%) with a cCR; 17 patients (49%) with residual tumours that appeared clinically malignant were referred for TEM or abdominal surgery. In the remaining seven (20%), the residual tumour clinically appeared benign. Of these, there were two invasive cancers, four high-grade dysplasias and one low-grade dysplasia. The five patients with dysplasia, underwent local lesion resection without recurrence within a median of 11 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of lesions that appeared clinically benign after radio(chemo)therapy were also benign on pathological examination. Thus, local excision of such lesions should be considered.
BACKGROUND: During an ongoing phase II observational study on watch and wait policy in rectal cancer, a substantial number of patients presented residual lesion after radiotherapy with a clinical benign appearance. This article aims to discuss the clinical significance of such findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Main entry criteria were age ≥70 years and small tumour (≤5 cm and ≤60% of circumferential involvement) located in the low rectum. Patients received chemoradiation (50 Gy, 2 Gy per fraction concomitantly with a 5-Fu bolus and leucovorin) or 5 × 5 Gy if considered unfit for chemotherapy. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) were observed. Those with persistent tumours underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery [TEM] if the baseline tumour was ≤3 cm and cN0 or total mesorectal excision. RESULTS: The watch and wait procedure was used in 11 out of the total 35 patients (31%) with a cCR; 17 patients (49%) with residual tumours that appeared clinically malignant were referred for TEM or abdominal surgery. In the remaining seven (20%), the residual tumour clinically appeared benign. Of these, there were two invasive cancers, four high-grade dysplasias and one low-grade dysplasia. The five patients with dysplasia, underwent local lesion resection without recurrence within a median of 11 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of lesions that appeared clinically benign after radio(chemo)therapy were also benign on pathological examination. Thus, local excision of such lesions should be considered.
Authors: Barbara M Geubels; Vincent M Meyer; Henderik L van Westreenen; Geerard L Beets; Brechtje A Grotenhuis Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Biagio Pecori; Secondo Lastoria; Corradina Caracò; Marco Celentani; Fabiana Tatangelo; Antonio Avallone; Daniela Rega; Giampaolo De Palma; Maria Mormile; Alfredo Budillon; Paolo Muto; Francesco Bianco; Luigi Aloj; Antonella Petrillo; Paolo Delrio Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Seong Ho Park; Seung Hyun Cho; Sang Hyun Choi; Jong Keon Jang; Min Ju Kim; Seung Ho Kim; Joon Seok Lim; Sung Kyoung Moon; Ji Hoon Park; Nieun Seo Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Emmanouil Fokas; Ane Appelt; Alexandra Gilbert; David Sebag-Montefiore; Claus Rödel; Robert Glynne-Jones; Geerard Beets; Rodrigo Perez; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Eric Rullier; J Joshua Smith; Corrie Marijnen; Femke P Peters; Maxine van der Valk; Regina Beets-Tan; Arthur S Myint; Jean-Pierre Gerard; Simon P Bach; Michael Ghadimi; Ralf D Hofheinz; Krzysztof Bujko; Cihan Gani; Karin Haustermans; Bruce D Minsky; Ethan Ludmir; Nicholas P West; Maria A Gambacorta; Vincenzo Valentini; Marc Buyse; Andrew G Renehan Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2021-08-04 Impact factor: 66.675
Authors: Fernando López-Campos; Margarita Martín-Martín; Roberto Fornell-Pérez; Juan Carlos García-Pérez; Javier Die-Trill; Raquel Fuentes-Mateos; Sergio López-Durán; José Domínguez-Rullán; Reyes Ferreiro; Alejandro Riquelme-Oliveira; Asunción Hervás-Morón; Felipe Couñago Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 5.742